Re: Should we complete the WebID spec?

po 6. 11. 2023 v 17:28 odesílatel Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> napsal:

> On 2023-11-06 16:51, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> > The current group is aligned on the utility of JSON-LD delivered over
> HTML
>
> Citation needed. I don't recall any "consensus" around any
>
> > The only slight clash is Sarven's document editor which uses RDFa, so if
> > I know Sarven, he'll fight hard for RDFa, but would be unlikely to get
> > consensus on that, IMHO.
>
> Oh Melvin, I'm always amused when you lure me in :) But you sure do know
> I love the topic on RDFa.
>
> So, the document editor ( https://dokie.li/ ,
> https://github.com/linkeddata/dokieli ) is not writing WebID Profile
> Documents (at this point). It consumes representations (of WebID Profile
> Documents or something else) in concrete RDF syntaxes just fine. It can
> also write using one of the concrete RDF syntaxes, generally plays along
> with server's Accept along with Accept-* methods, where sometimes their
> combinations are given by a specification.
>
> I "fight hard for RDFa" only when I need to dismiss FUD, not for the
> sake of RDFa. I understand the utility of each syntax just fine :)
>
> I argue for using RDFa in certain cases because it is more suitable than
> the other syntaxes - it is not a general rule by any means. But
> generally, see
> https://csarven.ca/linked-research-decentralised-web#why-rdfa
>
> (Just a heads-up: don't bother talking to me about "patching" RDFa in
> HTML being an issue unless you want to talk about "patching" RDF
> embedded in HTML tags or spell out all the mechanisms on the server-side
> that's actually required for that "patching" to work.)
>
> The fundamental and recurring issue that I find folks bumping into is a
> conflation of personal preferences vs. what's "better". It all depends
> on the criteria that's used to measure things.
>
> If we want to open up RDF in markup languages, don't arbitrarily limit
> syntaxes. Acknowledge
> https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-concrete-rdf-syntax (as well
> as any RDF syntax embedded in HTML script tags).
>
> As a matter of fact, I do know that it is possible to get a lot of
> mileage out of RDFa-based WebID Profile Documents, but I'm not here to
> convince folks about RDFa here at this point. Stuff is already
> well-documented, and it doesn't take much to implement and check things
> out (see also that why-rdfa).
>
> That aside, if one doesn't like or want to use RDFa, no problem! Say
> that exactly. Just kindly step aside and don't block others from using it.
>
> And, no, consensus in the Group doesn't at all imply that I approve
> everything or anything either. I'm one voice among many. I'll say my
> bit, and the group decides as a whole the best way forward.
>
> So, please take care of the words you use...
>

Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, I would be +1 JSON-LD and -1 RDFa wrt WebID

I had you down as the other way round, but if I'm wrong about that, I'd be
delighted.

>
>
> -Sarven
> https://csarven.ca/#i
>
>