- From: Owen Shepherd <owen.shepherd@e43.eu>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:35:06 +0100
- To: "'James M Snell'" <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'Goix Laurent Walter'" <laurentwalter.goix@telecomitalia.it>, <public-socialweb@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: James M Snell [mailto:jasnell@gmail.com] > Sent: 31 July 2014 18:32 > To: Owen Shepherd > Cc: Goix Laurent Walter; public-socialweb@w3.org > Subject: Re: Social API: Scope > > FWIW, AS2 does not *re-base* itself on JSON-LD, it aligns with JSON-LD. > It's a critical difference. That said, however, it makes perfect sense to > leverage as much of the existing semantic vocabularies as we can. VCard, > FOAF, the Org Ontology... the current > AS2 draft lists a minimal set [1] that ought to work with or without JSON- > LD processing. > > [1] http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg- > activitystreams/activitystreams2.html#jsonld > [Owen] What are your thoughts about just deferring to the RDFa core initial context[1]? There is an expression of this in JSON-LD format, to which any canonical/recommended JSON-LD initial context can delegate [2] We might declare that things are to be represented in some "normalized form" (to assist non-LD processors); for example, where a prefix exists, it must be used, and all uses of the dc11/dcterms prefixes must be replaced with dc. [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1 [2] http://www.w3.org/2013/json-ld-context/rdfa11
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2014 21:35:39 UTC