- From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 12:30:22 +0100
- To: public-socialweb@w3.org
- Message-ID: <550EA7CE.7070206@wwelves.org>
On 03/21/2015 07:14 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote: > All, > > We'll be having our regular weekly phone meeting on Tuesday, 24 March > 2015 at 17:00 UTC (1PM EST, 10AM PST). > > https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-24 > > Please be there! Thank you Evan! I see on agenda many AS2.0 issues which we didn't get to during F2F. All of them have links to relevant ISSUEs & ACTIONs in W3C tracker, which in turn have various notes and links to relevant wiki pages. Everyone please try to follow links to tracker and wiki and refresh on the background of those topics! I would suggest to at least take a look at those 2 topics this week: ## Collections/Containers * since we have seen demos of LDP and see it as piece of technology we want to build on. It may make sense to reuse ldp:Container instead of coming up with as:Collection. * yesterday i sent email with question on how we can 'follow our nose' via known predicates to discover relevant containers. I already started deploying early (thinking out loud) prototype to my website! https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2015Mar/0130.html ## MediaObject and as:Link I propose starting with figuring out how we handle MediaObject. Actually I chose to use them in experiments with Collections/Containers which I currently started on my website. On linked wiki page you can find problem statement and few additional pieces of information. Currently AS2.0 core spec uses as:Link to handle MediaObject, personally I see removing as:Link from the spec, resulting in making design much more straight forward to implement. ## implicit knowledge / inference This one I would prefer to move to next week. After deploying Containers with Media Object on my websites, I plan to work on demo showing how *lightweight* inference based on RDFa Vocabulary Expansion, could allow letting publisher to chose if they use AS2.0, schema.org, microformats etc. *vocabulary* while consumers would interpret it in exactly the same way. Cheers!
Received on Sunday, 22 March 2015 11:30:39 UTC