Re: Regular SWICG meetings and CG process

I suggest that Kevin goes too far in saying that @context is merely a
"courtesy to those who like using LD tooling." The use of JSON-LD when
creating objects is a requirement of the specification even though only a
JSON representation is considered to conform to the standard. The reliance
on JSON-LD not only facilitates extensions, it also ensures interworking
with those who wish to use "LD tooling" to process objects in formats other
than JSON. But, the requirement that objects be in JSON, not some format
which via JSON-LD tools could be converted to JSON, ensures that those
uninterested in alternative canonicalizations can remain blissfully
ignorant of them and unburdened by them.

As with most other protocols, we should follow Postel's Law
<https://devopedia.org/postel-s-law>: "Be liberal in what you accept, and
conservative in what you send." Those who create objects to be read by
others must ensure that those objects conform to the standard and also to
JSON-LD. However, those who read objects are properly less constrained.

bob wyman


On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 4:17 PM Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023, 10:23 Bumblefudge von CASA, <
> virtualofficehours@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/30/2023 4:10 AM, Aaron Gray wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>> 1.5. JSON-LD @context extension declarations and comprehension
>>
>>     https://json-ld.org/
>>
>> Yes, the core specs are LD-based and without a little tooling and harness
>> work, it can be very hard to have interop deeper than the API layer.
>> Hearing that Evan has pieces of and can revive a self-service validator for
>> AS2 objects is great news, this feels like step 0 to me.  The LD wizards
>> and the catherders need to work together on making this kind of stuff more
>> accessible and self-service, so that newcomer implementers without an LD
>> background don't smash their head against it and develop a deep, debatably
>> justified grudge at that layer.
>>
>
> This is being repeated, and it is a mistake.
> The core specs are not LD-based. They are JSON based, but included the
> @context as a courtesy to those who like using LD tooling.
>
> You do not need to use LD to interoperate with ActivityPub or
> ActivityStreams, and if you do use LD you need to be careful to make the
> output compatible with the JSON form again afterwards if you expect to feed
> it back into AP or AS tools.
>
>