- From: Jacopo Scazzosi <jacopo@scazzosi.com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 11:28:36 +0100
- To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
Hello Melvin, First of all, the concept of “hard fork” does not apply here. Nobody is trying to fork the WebID specifications and, as I’ve explained in [1] and elsewhere, the 2014 ED makes its own nature as an ED very clear. Also, note that "format neutrality” would be just as breaking a change as the MUST on Turtle and JSON-LD for publishers. As for the latter, support for it has mostly been stated in [7] but also appears in other threads, such as [8]. Furthermore, as per issue #61 [6], which in turn started off of [5], there’s a significant chance that the option of dropping all MUSTs on serialization formats might accrue an even larger consensus than the MUST on Turtle and JSON-LD for publishers. I’m waiting for others to pitch in before re-assessing where the largest consensus lies. With reference to your other email to the group [2], note that PR #60 [3] already changes the definitions to make them more neutral when it comes to serialization formats. See this line [4] in particular. Best, Jacopo. [1]: https://github.com/w3c/WebID/issues/58#issuecomment-1925809369 [2]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2024Feb/0064.html [3]: https://github.com/w3c/WebID/pull/60 [4]: https://github.com/w3c/WebID/pull/60/files#diff-274f5e91238718e44b429797b66dcdc21e2d576ae2e0e769f0279840e5196945R195 [5]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2024Feb/0005.html [6]: https://github.com/w3c/WebID/issues/61 [7]: https://github.com/w3c/WebID/issues/3 [8]: https://github.com/w3c/WebID/issues/17#issuecomment-1877196126
Received on Saturday, 17 February 2024 10:28:56 UTC