On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 04:54, Nathan Rixham <nathan@webr3.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:19 PM Tomasz Pluskiewicz <tomasz@t-code.pl> > wrote: > >> >> And yet isn’t most software worldwide plain JSON over HTTP, with some >> RAML or Open API if you’re lucky? >> >> But I think I will stop here, since we appear to be getting nowhere :) >> > Look for a 'coherent' definition; and it ends up looking like decoherence; but I think, had some areas of debate that could be summarised as a topically defined area of 'scope' / 'requirements'?? Maybe therein; some consideration around modal structures? IDK. > Agree on both points, seeing this degenerate into httpRange-14, confusion > over resource vs representation, confusion over protocols vs abstract > concepts, of the duality of resource names, is a pity indeed. > > Regarding JSON over HTTP, could that not be a part of RWW? If we focus on > being media type agnostic, and avoid rdf/linked data completely, then it'll > work for everything, which includes linked data. Focus on the super set. > Yup. fairly sure 'facebook mode' should be supported.... but perhaps a different 'modal structure' / backwards compatibility? i'm not sure their robots are so friendly, or caring... > Tomasz, fwiw Melvin & I were playing around with linkedobjects some time > ago, like a mini version of json-ld that you stick in data islands, then > access automatically via globalThis, is was actually v simple to both > implement and use, like a 5 line shim that made json-ld and json accessible > in a nice way. >
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2021 19:17:48 UTC