- From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:14:42 +0100
- To: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>, public-socialweb@w3.org
- CC: gregg@greggkellogg.net
- Message-ID: <54F9D272.7000604@wwelves.org>
On 03/06/2015 03:35 PM, Erik Wilde wrote: > hello elf. > > On 2015-03-06 15:24, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote: >> We could look at possibly to have *Lite* and *Full* versions of AS2.0. >> In Lite, one could ignore even this lightweight inference but would have >> less robust construct at hand. Producer would also need to stay more >> explicit if they want *exactly* the same interpretation by Lite >> consumers. >> Producer who care about same interpretation by *Lite* consumers would >> need to assert "@type": ["Respond", "Like"] >> If Producer accepts *slightly* different interpretation by Lite and Full >> consumers. "@type": ["Like"] would only get interpreted as "@type": >> ["Respond", "Like"] by Full consumers, Lite would miss interred "@type": >> ["Respond"] - IMO reasonable consequence if someone doesn't want to >> implement AS2.0 Full support. > > the problem with this model is that i am usually dealing with a SOA with > a whole bunch of AS producers and consumers in it. it seems that the > lite/full model would only produce predictable results if all components > in the SOA implement the same level, and i somehow have a way to find > out what that level is. let's all start implementing what we have so far and start producing and consuming AS2.0, i can implement *Full* with such *lightweight* inference and you can work with *Lite* without it, then we can see if we encounter some real issues? > > personally, i think we should have one well-defined way of what a "like" > actually *is*. either it *is* a respond and everybody has to treat it > accordingly (for the floops this is trickier to get right, because you > have no way of knowing how the floop has been defined without a formal > description, which right now we do not have), or it is a like and > nothing but a like. in all other cases, we create a spec where the > behavior of the ecosystem depends on local context that i can neither > discover nor control, and that would be unfortunate. i don't like the idea that to keep 'bottom line' low, we don't allow any more sophisticated patterns! so far we have one clear example with Respond, Like, Floop * http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#activity-types * http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#object-types which I hope to cover with * rdf:type * rdfs:subClassOf * owl:equivalentClass can we think of examples for properties? eg. participant, endorsee, homeboy * http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#properties which I hope to cover with * rdfs:subPropertyOf * owl:equivalentProperty similar to http://schema.org/participant current AS2.0 draft doesn't even use such constructs so we could also start without it! please notice that I also do NOT propose here any rdfs:domain & rdfs:range inferences, while Tantek seems to actively ask for it! ACTION-35 Come up with a simple proposal for implicit typing based on property names http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/35 > >> Discovery works by simply dereferencing http(s): URI of newly >> encountered term (in practice often already cached). Depending on how we >> decide on AS2.0 serializations, it MUST return application/ld+json >> description of the term (or the whole vocab if # pattern used, as in >> AS2.0 itself), it MAY return text/turtle and text/html (RDFa). Again we >> should discuss Content Negotiation sooner than later. > > so what you're saying is that a verb URI MUST be dereferencable, and > that it MUST dereference to RDF defining that term in a specific way, so > that all implementations can base their inference on it? that would be > one way to go, but in this case we would definitely get into "RDF > required" territory to get an AS ecosystem working. if one want's to use just a unique identifier, then can use non dereferencable URI, or use HTTP URL but don't provide any meaningful response (Lite) if one want's to give some additional *meaning* to given type of Verb, then one needs to use dereferencable URI respond to request with JSON-LD, and optionally other RDF serializations (Full) services like https://w3id.org/ can come handy for stable and dereferencable URIs it looks like xAPI community starts arriving at such conclusion based on their work, we may have call next wednesday and I can fwd you invite if you feel like joining it https://www.w3.org/Social/InterestGroup/track/actions/5
Received on Friday, 6 March 2015 16:15:08 UTC