- From: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:51:21 -0400
- To: public-socialweb@w3.org
On 2015-10-19 18:00, James M Snell wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> wrote: > [snip] >> >> What breaks when you reuse the existing media types? >> >> How are the existing media types insufficient to AS2's needs? >> > > Among other things, AS2 requires: > (a) the use of a normative @context definition; > (b) the use of JSON-LD compact form; > (c) that all date/time values use ISO8601 format > (d) that the AS1 "objectType" and "id" values MUST NOT be used. > (e) the implementations MUST treat all objects as derivatives of > as:Object unless the the object uses @type:as:Link > (f) that AS defined terms be preferred over overlapping terms from > other vocabularies > Using "application/ld+json" does not communicate to a receiver any of > these additional constraints. Neither does any media type for that matter. Nor is there any assurance that the payload will follow through all the constraints and expectations of the vocabulary. > Which means in order to communicate these additional constraints, a > profile parameter would need to be used, in which case you've > accomplished nothing more than you would by simply defining a new > media type. > > - James The fundamental difference is that, you can achieve all of that using application/ld+json without having to create a new media type! The profile parameter is just an URL which can describe the constraints, and an IANA registration is not necessary. Done. Creating application/activity+json doesn't break anything, but going through that process is certainly far more complex than simply working with what's available today. IMHO, the added complexity with a new media type is not justified. -Sarven http://csarven.ca/#i
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2015 01:51:54 UTC