this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
0 points (50.0% liked)

News from fediverse

0 readers
1 users here now

founded 11 months ago
0
idk where to really put this (might turn into a blog post later or something). it's what you might call a "hot take", certainly a heterodox one to some parts of the broader #fediverse community. this (mastodon.social)
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

idk where to really put this (might turn into a blog post later or something). it's what you might call a "hot take", certainly a heterodox one to some parts of the broader #fediverse community. this is in response to recent discussion on "what do you want to see from AP/AS2 specs" (in context of wg rechartering) mostly devolving into people complaining about JSON-LD and extensibility, some even about namespacing in general (there was a suggestion to use UUID vocab terms. i'm not joking)

1/?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

@[email protected] the core of the complaint is that people want to handle one key and one key only. they don't want to map terms to IRIs, or IRIs to terms. they'd prefer picking exactly one symbol and use that as the property key.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

@[email protected] And I always thought that this is some of the LD patterns that easily make sense: to globally identify each term used in your data by an IRI and to use the same IRI as a link to the term's documentation. Apparently, I was wrong.

OTOH, I get it when people don't think they need (to understand) JSON-LD but I also think it is not too much to ask to follow community patterns by slapping a context link into your JSON.