Re: Clarify objections to JSON [was Re: Getting the group back on track]

Jason,

Thank you for the constructive feedback. The Content type is really
intended as a base class for Article and Note (and others). Article is
really intended for things like blog entries or news articles. Note is
intended for short status type notes or comments. That said, however,
Note could easily fill the purpose you describe.

- James

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Jason Robinson <mail@jasonrobinson.me> wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Yes, I meant the vocab. For object types, diaspora* currently supports, from
> the AS2 vocab, Image, Question, Place, Mention, Profile. Events support will
> come at some point. For actual status messages, I'm hesitant to say which
> object would be used. Note, Article and Content seem very similar - and in
> diaspora* everything is just a status message, whether short one liner or a
> 30K char markdown formatted blog post. I guess Note might still be the right
> one. Likely incoming parsing would squash all three as the same. I guess a
> comment would just be Content|Note|Article with an "inReplyTo" attribute.
>
> Sorry if I sounded too critical. My email was meant to come as "let's go
> with this and move forward", not "let's spend time trimming AS2 down". As
> Christopher replied already - nothing forces implementers to support all of
> the vocab :) The AS2 spec is a good piece of work and there seems to be
> clear signs of support for adopting it.
>
> Br,
> Jason
>
>
>
> On 22.10.2015 22:54, James M Snell wrote:
>>
>> Hello Jason,
>>
>> Would you be able to provide some specific insight into which pieces
>> of the vocabulary aren't useful for diaspora? I assume that the
>> vocabulary is what you're primarily speaking about in terms of
>> "trimming down".
>>
>> - James
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Jason Robinson <mail@jasonrobinson.me>
>> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> AS2 is very ... large, but imho that is not all bad. It could be trimmed
>>> down, but then again it should have the necessary structures to compose
>>> messages with. The bad thing is the larger it is, the less implementers
>>> will
>>> be able to implement all of it. I can say for example for the needs of
>>> the
>>> current features in diaspora*, only a small subset can be used - the rest
>>> of
>>> it would just have to be ignored or parsed in to more basic structures
>>> (like
>>> I think Note would be the basic "status message", which could be a
>>> catch-all
>>> when something isn't supported).
>>>
>> [snip]
>
>
> --
> -----
> Br,
> Jason Robinson
> https://jasonrobinson.me
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 24 October 2015 23:07:10 UTC