Re: Social data /syntax/ vs Social data /vocabulary/

• From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
• Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 09:27:38 +0200
• To: public-socialweb@w3.org
• Message-ID: <540FFD6A.9060009@wwelves.org>

On 09/09/2014 01:31 AM, Owen Shepherd wrote:
> Spurred by a conversation in [1]
> 
> Our WG charter says that one of our deliverables is
> 
>       *
> 
>         *Social Data Syntax*
>             A JSON-based syntax to allow the transfer of social
>             information, such as status updates, across differing social
>             systems. One input to this deliverable is ActivityStreams
>             2.0 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-activitystreams-05>.
> 
> Now, there is an open question of should we be defining a /syntax/ or a
> /vocabulary*/?
Reading at https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_syntax_requirements
"Represent entities such as
* People
* Groups / Organizations
* Projects
* Events
* Relationships / Affiliations (interpersonal, organizational)
[...]
Ability to Represent "semantic content" such as
* Articles
* Badges
* Status Updates
* Albums
"

Sounds to me like expectation of having some kind of vocabulary, but of
course I may interpret it wrong.

Received on Wednesday, 10 September 2014 07:29:55 UTC