- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2023 18:19:22 +0100
- To: Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk>
- Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-solid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhLj=ad7D+-d9oW-T3BDqzykGCeHu8ZYhngVq+jqNDbOOA@mail.gmail.com>
st 1. 11. 2023 v 18:06 odesÃlatel Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> napsal: > Quoting Melvin Carvalho (2023-11-01 17:15:29) > > st 1. 11. 2023 v 16:56 odesÃlatel Kingsley Idehen < > kidehen@openlinksw.com> > > napsal: > > To put some numbers on it, and while numbers are not everything, > according > > to common crawl: > > > > HTML on the web: 98.3908% > > Turtle on the web: 0.0013% > > > > Bear in mind that the HTML can be further sub divided into HTML with data > > in it. > > > > As such a standard for data on the web, has better chances of broad > > adoption, if HTML is included. > > Noone talks about including or excluding HTML or anything else. > > Here's how I would describe it, similarly casually: > > We discuss if sensible that the spec *require* that *ALL* human and > technical agents embracing this new spec *MUST* be able to parse and > serialize HTML. Including a microcontroller in your shoes, causing it > to need heavier batteries, consume more power and be more expensive, > because it requires more powerful computation and more memory than if > tolerable to only implement a JSON-based API. And including a a future > super lightweight Wikipedia browser bypassing the HTML layer and > instead browsing/searching/editing wiki markup directly with metadata as > human-friendly RDF/Turtle, but anyway bloating to hundreds of megabytes > in size and gigabytes in memory consumption due to needing a fullblown > web browser as silly baggage only to comply with spec demands. > > ...or if the spec only require RDF (in whatever form or shape), and > merely *RECOMMEND* that user agents support HTML, because communication > offering a document-web fallback aids in a more webby semantic data web. > Jonas, if we were to agree that a Solid Lite spec should have as few MUSTs as possible (without, at this point, making a specific choice). But that it could have as many SHOULDs or MAYs as people wanted, do you think that would be a reasonable basis on which to proceed? > > > - Jonas > > -- > * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt > * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ > * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones > > [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Received on Wednesday, 1 November 2023 17:19:43 UTC