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

Re: ISSUE-7: Are as consumers required to understand the pre-json-ld syntax?

From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:01:22 +0100
Message-ID: <54F96CE2.4020509@berkeley.edu>
To: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, Social Web Working Group <public-socialweb@w3.org>
hello elf.

On 2015-03-06 09:52, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> IMO JSON-LD provides solid foundations to align our work with efforts in
> other W3C groups.

our main goal is produce something that is used by people and developers 
outside of the W3C.

> if we decide not to use it, i think we should have
> solid (and well documented) reasons motivating such choice, for me
> compatibility with AS1 doesn't sound like a reason for not using
> JSON-LD, but of course everyone should develop one's own opinion...

it seems to me that harry has always pointed out that plain JSON is 
something that we want to have, and that JSON-LD is icing on the cake. 
we tend to have different opinions on how easily you can put that 
particular icing on that particular cake when at the same time you want 
to maintain extensibility and robust interoperability.

iff plain *and* RDFified views are what we want, then i would still be 
in favor of clean layering. let's have a JSON spec that talks about JSON 
only. and then let's have an "RDF view of AS" through a separate spec 
that is based on the plain one and JSON-LD.



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 Friday, 6 March 2015 09:01:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 8 December 2016 15:48:20 UTC