Re: JSON-LD Community Group

> On May 3, 2023, at 11:09 AM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> st 3. 5. 2023 v 19:21 odesílatel Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>> napsal:
>> Minutes for today’s call are here: https://json-ld.org/minutes/2023-05-03/. We are going back to bi-weekly calls, with the next call on May 17th.
>> 
>> A recurring topic will be triage of JSON-LD WG issues specifically listed on the group management page [1] under the “Discuss-Call” column. Items must have owners to lead the discussion for each issue, and members should be prepared to discuss for disposition.
>> 
>> * Issues that should be considered Raised Errata (Editorial or otherwise Substantive)
>> * Issues that are Raised Errata can be changed to “Erratum” with a summary describing the necessary change.
>> * Changes should lead to PRs subject to WG decisions on if/how/when to merge. There are preocess considerations for how to do this.
>> 
>> The JSON-LD WG should then discuss (either through email, issue discussion or their own calls) how to move forward with updating the recommendations.
> 
> Thanks for sharing this
> 
> What's the current thoughts on json-ld-star
> 
> My feeling is that most in the group were in favour.  Though most implementors outside the group might not know what it is.  Perhaps its a logical consequence of tracking RDF's evolution.

JSON-LD-star can’t really proceed until RDF-star is more mature, but should track it. My thought is that as work progresses, the CG work on JSON-LD-star will more forward, and could/should be picked up by the JSON-LD WG to be folded in to the specs for updated Recommendations.

> I feel a bit cautious in that im unsure the average web developer (TM) really knows json-ld 1.1 so far, or utilizes it full, e.g. things like relative links.
> 
> I dont really have a strong view, I wonder if it's heading towards json-ld 1.2, or 2.0 or json-ld-star its own thing.  I am guessing that consensus would be json ld star would need to go to 2.x ... but maybe not!

Existing errata could be released as an Edited 1.1 Recommendation. There are other deferred items that could go into a 1.2, which could include JSON-LD-star.

If RDF-star is in RDF 1.2, then having JSON-LD-star be in JSON-LD 1.x would make sense. IMO, it is a backwards compatible change, so a dot release would be fine. Generally. people seem to be wary about major releases.

Gregg

>  
>> 
>> 
>> Gregg Kellogg
>> gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>
>> 
>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/4