- From: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:45:26 -0400
- To: public-socialweb@w3.org
On 2015-10-19 17:11, James M Snell wrote: > 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. What breaks when you reuse the existing media types? How are the existing media types insufficient to AS2's needs? I think you have the burden of proof backwards. The question is not about "switching" to application/json or application/ld+json, but rather why not reuse what exists before jumping over hoops to push a yet-another-activity-streams media type? If there was a fundamental argument made for application/activity+json, can you kindly point me to it? -Sarven http://csarven.ca/#i
Received on Monday, 19 October 2015 21:46:03 UTC