- From: Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 16:23:40 -0500
- To: Olle Olsson <olleo@sics.se>
- Cc: public-socialweb-comments@w3.org
Olle Olsson writes: > The recently published > "Activity Vocabulary" > https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-activitystreams-vocabulary-20161215/ > confused me, as I read the following in the beginning > > 1. Introduction >> The Activity Streams 2.0 Core Syntax defines the JSON syntax for Activity >> Streams. This document defines the vocabulary properties. >> The *Activity Streams 2.0 Vocabulary* defines a set of abstract types and >> properties that describe past, present and future Activities. The >> vocabulary is defined in two parts: > > > It is not completely obvious that what I emphasized in the quote above > actually refers to *this* document. I.e. that "Activity Vocabulary" == > "Activity Streams 2.0 Vocabulary" ! > > Why not let *this* spec have the full name? > > At least, the other foundational document, which is here referred to as > Activity Streams 2.0 Core Syntax > is published with the name > Activity Streams 2.0 > Not the full name, but at least more specific than for the vocabulary spec. > > Regards, > > /olle I agree fwiw that "Activity Streams 2.0 Vocabulary" would be a lot clearer. It's confused me a few times as well, and I'm pretty familiar with things here.
Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2017 21:24:10 UTC