Re: extension model of RSS/Atom (ISSUE-16 discussion)

hello elf.

On 2015-04-12 00:36, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> On 04/07/2015 10:06 PM, Erik Wilde wrote:
>> Atom is doing things differently because XML provides a better way of
>> separating vocabularies with namespaces. that's an important benefit
>> that neither JSON nor JSON-LD have. that also makes it easier to
>> separate possible future spec changes from openness/extensions. again
>> that's something that we don't get out of the box.
> Could you please explain how do you see JSON-LD not having capacity to
> separate vocabularies with namespaces?

JSON-LD maps things into RDF where things aren't namespaced, but simply 
identified by URI. regardless of that, what a context does is only 
visible to you when you implement JSON-LD and then look at the mapped 
data. the current extensibility model does not require

(a) a context to be present to begin with, and

(b) JSON-LD processing to make use of it, if it is.

you're definitely right that one can be disciplined in AS2, and it seems 
that you are. but that's because you're operating in RDF-land and make 
sure that everything in AS2 is used to make this possible.

since for now we're still saying we're "JSON-based" and should also 
demonstrate what this means when you're *not* operating in RDF-land, we 
have to be clear what it means when people are not as careful as you, 
and what it means for these two different user groups (JSON users and 
RDF users) to interact via AS2.

you can think of this as the exact equivalent of pre-infoset XML: people 
could be disciplined and use it in the way later formalized by XMLNS, 
but pre-XMLNS, it was ok for people to produce non-XMLNS XML, and the 
question then is what's that supposed to mean. we keep dodging that 
question, and i think it's going to bite us.



erik wilde |  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 |
            | UC Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
            | |

Received on Sunday, 12 April 2015 16:30:09 UTC