- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:00:50 +0200
- To: public-socialweb@w3.org
Looking forward to the possibility of using form-encoding in the API,
maybe it would be useful to de-namespace all stable microformats - which
TimBL and the W3C agreed it was OK to normatively reference in W3C specs
- and put them in the ActivityStreams Vocabulary?
Does that make sense?
Then, rather than vCard, we'd also just have hCard/vCard (although a
quick double-check to make sure they line-up 100% is in order.
cheers,
harry
On 04/23/2015 06:45 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> Yes that's exactly the plan. The jsonld context would do the heavy lifting
> here.
> On Apr 23, 2015 9:44 AM, "hhalpin" <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-04-23 06:53, Renato Iannella wrote:
>>
>>> On 23 Apr 2015, at 1:41 am, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> While this is helpful, the use of the namespace prefix is irritating.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why is it irritating?
>>>
>>
>> My guess is some developers - particularly those who aren't using RDF
>> somewhere mentally - don't like using namespaces, and often accidently
>> leave them out. I know I've seen that in some usages of FOAF by non-RDF
>> aware developers in the past.
>>
>> Would there be a way of sorting this out in the JSON-LD context, so that
>> RDF-aware processors could properly namespace the vCard vocabulary usage
>> while your ordinary JSON developer on the street would just process without
>> namespaces (since they wouldn't be resolving them to begin with)?
>>
>>
>>> Cheers...
>>> Renato Iannella
>>> Semantic Identity
>>> http://semanticidentity.com
>>> Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Harry Halpin (W3C/MIT) harry@w3.org
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 15:00:54 UTC