- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 10:24:28 -0700
- To: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, public-socialweb@w3.org
what about:
On 2014-09-21, 9:00, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
>>> Now, there is an open question of should we be defining a /syntax/ or a
>>> /vocabulary*/?
we need both.
- a vocabulary is the set of concepts that are meaningful for the
relevant domain. you can define a vocabulary in some existing metamodel
framework, or do it ad hoc. both choices have good and bad side-effects.
- a syntax is a representation that has well-defined rules how to
serialize a vocabulary instance into the representation, and how to
parse a representation into the domain model. without a syntax, you
cannot have protocols or other ways of exchanging data.
> Could we try clarify this distinction between /syntax/ and /vocabulary/
> before tuesday call?
is the above distinction clear enough? for AS1, it was pretty clear:
- the vocabulary was in an ad hoc metamodel, and thus there was little
baggage (but also little out-of-the-box support) associated with it.
- the syntaxes were JSON and Atom, and for both syntaxes it was defined
how the vocabulary model maps to the syntax model.
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 Sunday, 21 September 2014 17:25:00 UTC