AW: Clarification of as:content?

Thanks for the update. Makes it much clearer from my perspective.

What about putting a cross reference to “summary” here with the explanation that James gave. I think we should not keep this information in the discussion group here but bring it for the spec for everybody to read. Otherwise, similar questions might stay unanswered by people trying to adopt the spec.

 

Von: Robert Sanderson [mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2015 23:55
An: James M Snell <jasnell@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com>; James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>; public-socialweb@w3.org
Betreff: Re: Clarification of as:content?

 

Kevin, 

 

The definition I proposed and James merged (many thanks!) is:

 

The content or textual representation of the Object. Markup, including references to visual elements such as images, MAY be included. The content MAY be expressed using multiple language-tagged values.

See: http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-vocabulary/#dfn-content-term

 

Previously it had been specific about "natural langauge" and "HTML markup", both of which would have ruled out SVG. This seems like a perfect example of what would now be in scope that was otherwise unclear.

 

Rob

 

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:10 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@us.ibm.com <mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com> > wrote:

Yes, it could, since SVG is a text based format.

 

- James Snell
jasnell@us.ibm.com <mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com> 
Technology & Partnerships
IBM Open Technologies Architect - Node.js, Mobile Backend & Cloud
(559) 707-6331 <tel:%28559%29%20707-6331>  (mobile) 

 

 

----- Original message -----
From: Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com <mailto:kevinmarks@gmail.com> >
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com <mailto:jasnell@gmail.com> >
Cc: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com <mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com> >, "public-socialweb@w3.org <mailto:public-socialweb@w3.org> " <public-socialweb@w3.org <mailto:public-socialweb@w3.org> >
Subject: Re: Clarification of as:content?
Date: Wed, Nov 4, 2015 1:09 PM
  

I assume if the image is SVG then content would contain it directly?

  

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:31 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com <mailto:jasnell@gmail.com> > wrote: 

This is one bit that is admittedly lacking in the current vocabulary
definition and I appreciate the question on it.

The fact of the matter is that `content` varies a bit based on the
type of object. For a `Note` or `Article`, the `content` property
contains the content of the resource itself. It's the actual markup
text for the note/article.

For an `Image` object, `content` is likely far less useful. In the use
case you describe, using the `summary` field would be more
appropriate:

{
  "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
  "@type": "Image",
  "displayName": "Small Red Square",
  "summary": "<p>This image is a small red square, for unknown use.</p>",
  "height": 100,
  "width": 100
}

Using `content` in this case wouldn't be appropriate because unless
you've base64 or hex encoded it, there's no means of actually
including the actual binary content of the image resource in the JSON
serialization.

In short: `content` == the actual content of the resource, while
`summary` == the description or short summary of the content. I can
play around with some alternative ways of describing that in the
vocabulary document and I'm always open to suggestions on how to
improve the text :-)

- James 


On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:18 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com <mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
> Apologies for the likely newbie question, which is likely the first of many.
> Please bear with me, and hopefully they can be treated as a input from
> someone without all of the background knowledge you all have ... like most
> readers will be :)
>
>
> The `content` of an Object is "A natural language description of the object
> content.".  But not the content of the resource itself?  Traditionally one
> would call the property "description" rather than "content"? Which is not to
> start a naming discussion, just to make sure that `description` is the
> operative word, not `content` :)
>
> So this:
>
> {
>   "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
>   "@type": "Image",
>   "displayName": "Small Red Square",
>   "content": "<p>This image is a small red square, for unknown use.</p>",
>   "height": 100,
>   "width": 100
> }
>
> Could be a 100x100 image, and `content` would describe the image, and
> displayName give a label for it. (As per the example in the attachment
> definition)
>
> So ... if you have a Note or Article without a URI, is there a way to
> provide the actual representation of the resource, rather than a description
> of that (err) content?  Example 135 / Fig 37 in -core, however, gives the
> impression that the representation is in the content field?
>
> Could someone please show how to model this situation in AS:
>
> The Object is a Note with the uri http://example.org/note1.md.  It's in
> Markdown and the note's representation is "You __won't believe__ what
> happens at the end of [this video](youtube)!".  The description of that
> content is the HTML: "<span>Clickbait in Markdown</span>".
>
> Thanks!
>
> Rob
>
> --
> Rob Sanderson
> Information Standards Advocate
> Digital Library Systems and Services
> Stanford, CA 94305
 

 





 

-- 

Rob Sanderson

Information Standards Advocate

Digital Library Systems and Services

Stanford, CA 94305