Re: internationalization issues

On 10/23/2015 07:06 PM, Aaron Parecki wrote:
> It doesn't cause any problems *parsing*, but it means you can't use object
> notation in most languages.
> 
> $foo->@context is not valid syntax in PHP or nearly any language I can
> think of. It limits the use to array/hash notation, like $foo['@context']
> in PHP.

for @id and @type AS2.0 JSON-LD context could alias them:
* "uid": "@id"
* "type": "@type"

removing @ 'pains' and taking it also bit closer to Microformats naming
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping

it does have some consequences when you mix different contexts, but IMO
we could still live with them:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-linked-json/2015Sep/0000.html

when it comes to @context, I keep hearing claims that most people will
ignore it anyhow ;)

in practice, information in @context sets... context, so for example
helper methods can use it to expand URIs in various comparison
operations, i don't really find big need to access information in
@context directly most of the time!

> 
> ----
> Aaron Parecki
> aaronparecki.com
> @aaronpk <http://twitter.com/aaronpk>
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Amy G <amy@rhiaro.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> 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
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Received on Friday, 23 October 2015 17:46:35 UTC