W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-socialweb@w3.org > January 2015

Re: FYI: Interval Vocabulary

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 07:23:50 -0800
Message-ID: <CABP7RbfTG8k0z6=BXxfBDTygcU3wLhiZktUqGVFU2FA0pjsAAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Cc: public-socialweb@w3.org
On Jan 17, 2015 5:45 PM, "Erik Wilde" <dret@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> hello james.
>
>
> On 2015-01-15 20:32, James M Snell wrote:
>>
>> One could, in theory replace start and end time with this but that's not
>> my intention here. Those are preexisting carryovers from AS1 and there's
>> really no reason to change those that I can see. Perhaps if someone
>> demonstrated some practical value in doing so...
>
>
> i was just curious, because at least ideally, the same concepts when used
in different AS vocabularies should be expressed in consistent ways, rights?
>

Ideally, yes. But given that a) startTime and endTime predate Interval and
b) AS2 is rec track and Interval has no official standing yet, it becomes
much harder to justify.

One thing you can do, however, is (within your system), treat as:Activity
as a subclass of i:Interval and as:startTime/as:endTime as either
equivalent to or subproperties of i:lower/i:upper and you'd largely be able
to accomplish the same thing without requiring a change to AS2.

- James

> the main reason from our point of view is that eventually, we would still
like to come up with "ASQL", the "Activity Stream Query Language", that
would allow AS users to work with any kind of AS data in a concise and
consistent fashion. to me it seems that this is much easier if there's a
common way of expressing (and reusing, when possible) concepts across AS
vocabularies, so that any data can be processed according to its AS
semantics.
>
> and if you're saying now that this is *not* what you were asking for, "a
demonstrated practical value", you're certainly right. it's simply
something we have noticed while using AS, that using it declaratively would
be much better than just treating it as random JSON, and shared concepts
would help a great deal.
>
> thanks for the feedback and cheers,
>
> dret.
Received on Sunday, 18 January 2015 15:24:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:26:14 UTC