Re: internationalization issues

The '@' symbol seems not to cause any problems with default json parsing in
python and php, what were you using?

Amy
On Oct 23, 2015 9:14 AM, "Harry Halpin" <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:

> Elf,
>
> On 10/23/2015 04:49 AM, elf Pavlik wrote:
> > On 10/22/2015 06:03 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>> I'll try to get to this next week, but my high-level feedback is likely
> >>> for AS2.0 to be successful everything outside the basic actor-verb
> model
> >>> and the kinds of metadata in Winer's RSS specs/Atom should be removed
> >>> and put back in Activity Vocabulary.
> > Harry, can you please reply with a short snippet of AS2.0 JSON data
> > which uses at least one term defined in microformats.org vocabulary?
> >
> > I believe that you feel comfortable with backing you proposal with
> > simple 5 lines of plain JSON which I see you keep promising to people!
>
>
> People who send email use natural language :)
>
>
> >
> >
> >> This makes no sense given that all of the properties are ALREADY
> >> defined in the Activity Vocabulary. The Core spec deals only with the
> >> serialization and relies on the Vocabulary document to define the
> >> actual terms.
> >>
> >>> I also am still strongly against the Activity Vocabulary being a
> >>> normative Recommendation, as it will lead to endless bikeshedding and
> >>> its a Sisyphean task to describe all social interactions using a single
> >>> vocabulary, and the vocabulary should align where possible with
> >>> IETF/microformats specs down to the 'string' level.
> >>> [snip]
> >> The Vocabulary does not attempt to define all social interactions,
> >> just a handful of those that we know are already relevant to a good
> >> number of existing social systems. If there are suggestions for
> >> removing specific terms, then I'm all for looking at those.
> >>
> >> As for bike shedding, if the minimal set of terms defined in the
> >> vocabulary document are not to any specific implementers liking, there
> >> is a well defined extensibility mechanism that allows developers to
> >> use terms from other vocabularies quite easily. Implementing support
> >> for such extensions is fairly trivial (e.g.
> >> https://github.com/jasnell/as2-schema)
> > Does this well defined mechanism still work if implementation chooses to
> > ignore JSON-LD context? I keep hearing from Harry about intentions for
> > such practice becoming common and I would like to verify that we don't
> > contradict ourselves here!
>
> Again, due to a relatively simple spec error on the part of the JSON-LD
> editors/Working Group, @context and any other attribute defined with a
> '@' symbol are not processed out of the box as objects by most modern
> programming languages. Thus, you have to give any JSON-LD defined '@'
> symbol special processing. While there it is possible everyone will
> start  using JSON-LD libraries, I expect many if not most developers
> will not use JSON-LD libraries but will want to consume AS2.0 as JSON.
> It's possible I'm wrong, but that's the feedback I've gotten from
> Thoughtworks (whose IE application is still waiting) and others.
>
> In other words, we need to keep JSON-LD to keep RDF interop, but realize
> most people are not using RDF-based programming stacks. If AS2.0 is to
> be a genuine interop layer, design needs to take that into account and
> if JSON LD conventions are broken, c'est la vie.
>
>        cheers,
>             harry
> >
> >
> >> At this point in the process, it would be far more productive to focus
> >> on implementation and fixing the specific parts of the spec that make
> >> implementation difficult, etc.
> >>
> >> - James
> >>
>
>
>
>