Re: dfn-ojbect

On 8 November 2015 at 02:26, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nope. Just an editing error. They're two different things
>
I've been looking at the friend request example and seeing how we would do
that in Solid:

EXAMPLE 328
{
  "@context": [
    "http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
    {"colleagueOf": "http://purl.org/vocab/relationship/colleagueOf"}
  ],
  "@id": "http://example.org/connection-requests/123",
  "@type": "Offer",
  "actor": "acct:sally@example.org",
  "object": {
    "@id": "http://example.org/connections/123",
    "@type": "Relationship",
    "subject": "acct:sally@example.org",
    "relationship": "colleagueOf",
    "object": "acct:john@example.org"
  },
  "target": "acct:john@example.org"
}


I found the naming of Object/object/target slightly confusing in this
example.

Object has a number of meanings:

1. The Object is the parent class of the activity
2. The object is the "object" of an activity ie what is being done
3. The object is the "object" of the relationship, ie the "target"
4. Object is also an rdf : object as per subject/predicate/object as
mentioned in reification

I suppose at this point in time it's much too late to change.

But just to try and understand the sense.

Would the "object" in an activity roughly correspond to the term "activity"
ie what is the activity of this message?



> On Nov 7, 2015 5:04 PM, "Melvin Carvalho" <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Reading through the AS spec I come across two terms:
>>
>> Object
>> object
>>
>> One with capital and one with small.
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#dfn-object
>>
>> If I've understood correctly they are slightly different things, but yet
>> they point to the same URI in the spec.  Is this intentional?
>>
>