Re: Extended Vocabulary Drafts

On 11/25/2014 06:20 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> For todays "Extended Vocabulary" item... please take a look at the
> proposed draft updates below...
> 
> http://rawgit.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/extended-vocabulary/activitystreams2.html
> http://rawgit.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/extended-vocabulary/activitystreams2-vocabulary.html
> 
> - James
> 

Hi James,

Firs of all, thank you for all the hard work you put into this.
Especially with providing all those examples!

I would like to understand better you strategy on
Syntaxes / Vocabularies / Mappings / Conversions
mostly from perspective of extensibility.

In terms of serializations, I see:

1) fully supporting RDF (
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-new/#section-serializations )
* JSON-LD
* RDFa
* Turtle

2) Microdata which has mapping to RDF (one way only?)
http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata-rdf/

3) HTML with Microformats

In terms of vocabularies:

1) ActivityStreams (with some mappings to few other vocabs)
2) Microformats

My observations:

1) RDF serializations
* one can easily convert between all three RDF serializations (by design)
* allow straight forward mixing of vocabularies eg.
JSON-LD: "@type": ["as:Person", "schema:Person", "mf:h-card"]
RDFa:    typeof="as:Person schema:Person mf:h-card"
Turtle:  <> a as:Person, schema:Person, mf:h-card .

2) Microdata
* possibly no round trip conversion to RDF
* currently no support for inverse properties
* problematic for mixing multiple vocabularies
(we most likely need to investigate and document those various gotchas)

3) HTML with Microformats
* AFAICT currently no clear mapping of terms to URIs
* not even a notion of independent vocabularies?

4) Microformats vocabulary
* possibility of using with RDF serializations (if clear mapping to URIs)


I think we could possibly, with some effort, support all above for
*closed/limited* set of concepts. At the same time I don't see how to
ensure straight forward extensibility which enables people to work with
all the diversity of concepts specific to their domain of interest.

Thanks for sharing some more insights, especially with emphasis on
extensibility!

See also:
* http://manu.sporny.org/2011/uber-comparison-rdfa-md-uf/
* http://lov.okfn.org

Received on Monday, 1 December 2014 22:28:39 UTC