- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:11:07 +0100
- To: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- CC: public-socialweb@w3.org
hello elf. On 2014-11-13, 12:38, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote: > On 11/13/2014 12:51 AM, Erik Wilde wrote: > please accept my apologies for possibly turning our conversation > yesterday into an argument :( there's absolutely no need to apologize. you raised a valid question and i was just thinking about a good way to respond. i should do that with actual examples, but before i do that, here are the some things we should care and think about: - cases in which a client with JSON goggles sees something, and clients with JSON-LD goggles see something else. in the end, AS should be clear about what the relevant content of AS is, and how clients are expected to extract that from AS. if we have cases where that's not true, we have a problem, because different implementations then see different things, and that's an interoperability problem. - cases in which a client with JSON-LD goggles sees one thing, and this can be serialized in ways that lead to different JSON "views" of that thing. (a classical example for this kind of problem are XML namespace prefixes, which are supposed to be irrelevant, and to complicate things further, not all implementations allow full control over serialization.) this would mean that JSON-LD-goggled clients would never realize nor might they even have control over the fact that some JSON-LD peculiarities can result in relevant differences for JSON-goggled clients. - another thing i was wondering about is context drift. if the JSON counts, then the JSON-LD interpretation may change if the context definition changes, and that's neither under control nor even visible to AS producers and consumers. that's for example one reason why in many communities, any external information that materially changes a document's interpretation (classical examples are schema languages with default values) is severely frowned upon. is that a scenario we want to consider? should we at least mention it and say that JSON and JSON-LD interpretation can drift apart in the light of context changes? but you were absolutely right to ask for examples, and that's on my to do list. i hope my (still generic) explanations are a little bit clearer with regard to the scenarios i am worried about. thanks and cheers, dret. -- erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 | | UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) | | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2014 16:10:14 UTC