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

Re: AS2 Issues List

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 11:08:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7Rbd3ZHsfNxKOaW6A-3Z=8Eb_8Tw=gYr4z4DVqFOjadaBgw@mail.gmail.com>
To: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Cc: "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
Following the discussion on the call today, I'm going to stick to my
recommendation and make a specific proposal that we close the
following open issues. For the items that I say are already addressed
in the current draft, I'm not going to go through and reconcile those
with specific references to locations in the spec. The issues need to
include enough justification on their own to keep them open, otherwise
they are simply a waste of time. For items that might at some point in
the future have an alternative proposal put forward, a new action item
or proposal can be put forward. There's no use in holding an issue
open just in case an alternative proposal comes at some point in the
future.

ISSUE-4 - Explicit typing or support implicit typing - Already
addressed in current draft
ISSUE-7 - Are AS consumers required to understand the pre-JSON-LD
syntax -  Already addressed in current draft
ISSUE-12 - Action Types Structure and Processing Model - it was
decided already that RDF style reasoning should be supported but not
required.
ISSUE-14 - as:Link complexity - the spec already includes language
that deals with the relationship between as:Link and as:Object and how
they relate to one another. If there are specific suggestions to
improve the language, then ok. If the proposal is to remove as:Link,
then it ought to be a specific proposal to remove as:Link
ISSUE-15 - AS2.0 vocab duplicating microformats.org and schema.org
efforts - microformats and schema.org are not normative dependencies
for AS2.0. Some duplication is ok and ought to be expected.
ISSUE-20 - Support JSON Text Sequences? - out of scope, recommend
first seeing if there are ways of having JSON-LD generically support
JSON Text Sequences

- James



On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 9:55 AM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮
<perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:
> On 03/31/2015 06:44 PM, James M Snell wrote:
>> For the call today...
>>
>> I'm recommending closing the following issues:
>>
>> ISSUE-4 - Explicit typing or support implicit typing - Already
>> addressed in current draft
> doesn't have any references (links) to relevant section in a draft
>
>> ISSUE-7 - Are AS consumers required to understand the pre-JSON-LD
>> syntax -  Already addressed in current draft
> doesn't have any references (links) to relevant section in a draft
>
>> ISSUE-12 - Action Types Structure and Processing Model - it was
>> decided already that RDF style reasoning should be supported but not
>> required.
>> ISSUE-14 - as:Link complexity - the spec already includes language
>> that deals with the relationship between as:Link and as:Object and how
>> they relate to one another. If there are specific suggestions to
>> improve the language, then ok. If the proposal is to remove as:Link,
>> then it ought to be a specific proposal to remove as:Link
> -1 closing, I still work on alternative proposal for MediaObject and
> requested clarifications via mailing list about other uses for as:Link
>
>> ISSUE-15 - AS2.0 vocab duplicating microformats.org and schema.org
>> efforts - microformats and schema.org are not normative dependencies
>> for AS2.0. Some duplication is ok and ought to be expected.
> -1 not now, may still become at some point,
>
>> ISSUE-20 - Support JSON Text Sequences? - out of scope, recommend
>> first seeing if there are ways of having JSON-LD generically support
>> JSON Text Sequences
>> ISSUE-23 - Backwards compatibility in AS 2.0 - already dealt with in the draft
> +1 duplicate of ISSUE-7
>
>>
>> The following existing open issue still need discussion:
>>
>> ISSUE-13, Which activity types should be in the core? (Erik)
>> ISSUE-16, Improve spec structure (Erik) Specific suggested edits would
>> be helpful (PR anyone?)
>> ISSUE-17, Identity, Agent, Person, Persona, Account etc. need
>> clarifications (Elf)
>>
>> Raised Issues that need to be opened and resolved:
> -1 to opening many of them, I proposed creating ACTIONs instead on
> today's agenda:
> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-31#Tracking_of_Actions_and_Issues
>
>>
>> ISSUE-26, Representing Profiles (James)
>> ISSUE-27, Representing Changs to Profiles, (James)
>> ISSUE-28, Remodel "Connect" and "FriendRequest" or remove them, (James)
>> ISSUE-29, Removing Activity Types not used by User Stories, (James)
>> ISSUE-30, Deprecate "actor" in favor of "attributedTo", (James)
>> ISSUE-31, Refactor "target", "origin" and audience targeting, (James)
>> ISSUE-32, Deprecate "generator" and "provider" (James)
>> ISSUE-33, Deprecate or remove the "rating" property (James)
>> ISSUE-34, Context vs Motivation (James)
>> ISSUE-35, Simplify the Actor Types (see Issue-17 also) (James)
>> ISSUE-36, Leveraging JSON-LD context vs. RDF vocabulary (elf).
>> Specifically, do we want to leverage JSON-LD mechanisms for reverse
>> properties. There are inherent complexities
>> with this approach when working strictly with the JSON-LD expanded form.
>>
>>
>> Actions:
>>
>> ACTION-14 Setup json-ld context for namespace... Open ... still need this
>> ACTION-26 Review microformats examples... Open... ongoing
>> ACTION-29 Reach out to open social foundation members... recommend
>> closing, rather pointless at this time.
>>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 31 March 2015 18:09:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 8 December 2016 15:48:21 UTC