On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 at 20:15, Jacopo Scazzosi <jacopo@scazzosi.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > A NetID is a resolvable identifier that denotes and entity unambiguously. > > This identifier can resolve to JSON, JSON-LD, RDF-Turtle, etc profile > > documents as preferred by an Identity Provider -- leaving the agnostic > > nature of RDF to handle the inevitable and natural data messiness. > > > Keep JSON(-LD) as a SHOULD, have no serialisation as a MUST, this gives > the > > feel of a NetID type spec. > > Am I correct if I state that the implication, here, is that NetID clients > must > be able to work with all RDF serialization formats? If so, how do you make > this > future-proof so that clients do not break when new formats arise? > Removing MUST gives a degree of flexibility, but at the cost of potential guaranteed interop / future proofing The hope is that publishers and clients do sensible things, based on clear examples > > > > a) the W3C spec generally for Agent IDs - i.e. exact same as NetID > > b) the W3C spec for Agent IDs usable only where Turtle is spoken > > (others can call their Agent IDs NetID or BingoCards or whatever) > > c) the W3C spec for Agent IDs usable only where JSON(-LD) is spoken > > (others can call their Agent IDs NetID or BingoCards or whatever) > > IMHO, b) or c) limited to JSON. On top of the above, I fear a) would lead > to > *huge*, less maintainable clients. Which is not an issue in some cases but > can > be a significant one in others. > Agree, I favour MUST for JSON(-LD), but if that does not get consensus, I can live with SHOULD, as it enables me to work > > > Best regards, > Jacopo > >
Received on Monday, 24 January 2022 19:27:30 UTC