- From: Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:03:51 +0200
- To: "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
Amy G wrote: > Options could be either abstracting LDP-specific parts out of the SoLiD > spec and considering it on that basis, or reframing it instead as a > layer between the Social/Federation specs (whatever they end up looking > like) and LDP for implementers who /do /want to use LDP as the basis for > their server (the latter being beyond the scope of this WG). I do not see anything in the charter preventing the WG from using LDP. On the other hand it is good practice while developing standards to avoid reinventing wheels. It might be worth re-reading the sections "Scope" and "Recommendation-Track Deliverables" of the WG charter: http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter The charter of the Web Annotation WG also does not mention LDP: http://www.w3.org/annotation/charter/ But that WG now is creating a specification which "primarily builds upon the Linked Data Platform [ldp] recommendation": http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/protocol/wd/ Cheers, Andreas
Received on Friday, 24 July 2015 08:04:18 UTC