- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:11:20 -0700
- To: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
- Cc: "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> wrote: [snip] >> >> In my opinion, the concern is largely theoretical and is not backed >> by real implementation experience. There is nothing to be gained by >> switching to using the application/ld+json media type. Nor is there >> anything "broken" about using the "application/activity+json". > > > https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/52#issuecomment-125879060 > awaits your response. > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2015Oct/0055.html > awaits your response. > This note *is* my response. I remain unconvinced by any of the arguments given. > And good documentation here: > https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Media_type_for_AS2 > > "it does not break anything" doesn't come across as a convincing argument to > me because using application/json will work just fine. > > application/activity+json will only help you to know that the content which > comes along will resemble the use of the AS2 vocabulary. It still won't tell > you which JSON convention is used, and so it will require special > processing. > "which JSON convention is used" ... I have no idea what this means. Receiving 'application/activity+json' tells you that you're dealing with an Activity Streams 2.0 document. Nothing more, nothing less. It's still not clear what "breaks". > The AS2 Serialization Notes essentially says that if you don't use the > JSON-LD convention, well, take these measures so that we can sensibly end up > with JSON-LD any way. I find it odd that we are dancing around the JSON-LD > convention (a W3C Rec with decent adoption), but not just committing to it > because we want to allow arbitrary JSON conventions (which is a fine thing > to do in and of itself) but still map to JSON-LD. > > IMO, the arguments for reusing application/json or application/ld+json > outweigh inventing application/activity+json. > It's still not clear what the argument is and why things would break by using application/activity+json. > -Sarven > http://csarven.ca/#i >
Received on Monday, 19 October 2015 21:12:09 UTC