Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

Thank you for looping me in. It's probably worth mentioning that some proposed features for JSON-LD 1.1 may actually help us to keep JSON-LD *out* of the Web of Things specifications, or at least make it an optional mechanism for adding semantic annotations to an otherwise plain JSON

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

On 4/29/18 10:42 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2018, 19:35 L. David Baron wrote: > >> OK, here's a draft of an explicit abtension that I can submit later >> today. Does this seem reasonable? >> > > This looks good to me. Thank you. +1 We might want to also

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

On Sun, Apr 29, 2018, 19:35 L. David Baron wrote: > OK, here's a draft of an explicit abtension that I can submit later > today. Does this seem reasonable? > This looks good to me. Thank you. > > One concern that we've had over the past few years about JSON-LD > is that

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

This looks good and clearly covers all the concerns we discussed. Thanks for writing this up. If possible let’s make our answers public on this so we may more easily cite them in other discussions. This isn’t the last we’ve seen of the quiet attempts to JSON-LDify the web platform. -Tantek On

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

OK, here's a draft of an explicit abtension that I can submit later today. Does this seem reasonable? One concern that we've had over the past few years about JSON-LD is that some people have been advocating that formats adopt JSON-LD semantics, but at the same time allow processing as regular

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Adam Roach wrote: > On 4/27/18 2:02 PM, L. David Baron wrote: >> >> On Friday 2018-04-27 10:07 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote: >>> >>> For this reason, I think we should resist introducing dependencies on >>> JSON-LD in formats and APIs that are

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

On Friday 2018-04-27 16:09 -0500, Adam Roach wrote: > If there's a set of behaviors defined by the 1.0 spec, and a different set > of behaviors implemented, deployed, and evangelized, I think it would be > reasonable to object (on that basis) to a charter that does not explicitly > include work

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

On 4/27/18 2:02 PM, L. David Baron wrote: On Friday 2018-04-27 10:07 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote: For this reason, I think we should resist introducing dependencies on JSON-LD in formats and APIs that are relevant to the Web Platform. I think it follows that we should not support this charter. I

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

On Friday 2018-04-27 10:07 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote: > For this reason, I think we should resist introducing dependencies on > JSON-LD in formats and APIs that are relevant to the Web Platform. I > think it follows that we should not support this charter. I expect > this charter to pass in any

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: JSON-LD Working Group

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 1:04 AM, L. David Baron wrote: > The W3C is proposing a charter for: > > JSON-LD Working Group > https://www.w3.org/2018/03/jsonld-wg-charter.html > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2018Mar/0004.html > > Mozilla has the