Re: internationalization issues

On 10/23/2015 01:03 PM, Amy G wrote:
>
> The '@' symbol seems not to cause any problems with default json
> parsing in python and php, what were you using?
>
Failed for me in Ruby when we were doing digitalsocial.eu and also in
Clojure (Java underneath?) for Objective8.

So a significant sector of JSON-consuming world may have issues. Not
sure why "@" was chosen rather than just declaring some 'reserved
words', but its obviously too late to modify JSON-LD significantly as a
spec (although I'm not sure of its uptake in the wild).

       cheers,
           harry

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