Re: [AS2] Deprecate "url" in favor of "id" and "self" link relations

Hi all,

i have to say that i am a bit lost here in seeing all these alternative proposals. in particular i am  bit skeptical about the mix of AS-defined property names (objectType, id, etc) with potentially *any* iana link rel to be used as property name at the same level. I envision syntactic and semantic conflicts/overlaps in the future as we don’t know how the iana link rel registry will evolve…

in that sense it would be safer to separate, semantically & syntactically, what relates to the true object characteristics (basically type & id, displayName maybe and little more), from any “link” that represents or relates to it (for which link rels are powerful)
Two alternative could (at least) be:

  *
 via a specific *container* “links” property at object level (which syntax may be taken from webfinger’s jrd or simplified), which would embed all the link rels
  *
by leveraging possibly json-ld to distinguish the “true object properties” from the additional properties at the same level (which at this point could stay as per James’ latest proposal of using directly link rels)

walter

De : James M Snell<mailto:jasnell@gmail.com>
Envoyé : ‎jeudi‎ ‎21‎ ‎août‎ ‎2014 ‎22‎:‎37
À : activity-streams@googlegroups.com<mailto:activity-streams@googlegroups.com>
Cc : public-socialweb@w3.org<mailto:public-socialweb@w3.org>

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Owen Shepherd <owen.shepherd@e43.eu> wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> Can you please give some concrete examples? I'll see if I can explain
>> the rationale for the changes using those examples.
>>
>
> I hope you will understand if I say this will take a bit of extra time to
> put together. I'll try to do so soonish :-)
>

+1

> One simple example, a video object in AS1 looks like
>
>  {
>     "objectType": "video",
>     "displayName": "Cute little kittens",
>     "embedCode": "<video width='320' height='240'
> controls='controls'>...</video>",
>     "stream": {
>       "url": "http://example.org/my_video.mpg"
>     },
>     "image": { "url": "http://example.com/my_video.mpg.jpg"},
> }
>
>
>
> Per your AS2 examples, this image would go from being a Media Link to an
> Object. Therefore, it would "decompose" into a separate object, and would
> require fetching from the database by processors.

How I would represent this in AS2 would be:

{
  "objectType": "video",
  "displayName": "Cute little kittens",
  "content": "<video width='320' height='240'> controls='controls'>...</video>",
  "id": "http://example.org/my_video.mpg",
  "image": "http://example.com/my_video.jpg"
}

"image" is defined as a Link Value, which means it can be either an
IRI or an Object. The object form is only required if you wish to
define additional properties about the referenced resource.

>
> This object is not meaningful. It has no purpose on it's own, and no
> identifier. In other words, it is pointless it being an object; hence why I
> like the distinction between media links and objects, because they avoid
> such meaningless objects.

Unless you're specifying additional properties for the linked
resource, it shouldn't need to be expressed as a JSON object at all
(as in my example above).

- James

Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

[rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non è necessario.