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 items to bring the spec into line with reality.
I think the issue is that *some* of the users of the specification are doing this. I think we should strongly object to specifications that use it that way... but I still find it hard to formulate an objection to JSON-LD itself. (Especially for relatively small maintenance to the spec.) I think an analogy to what's happening would be to specs claiming to use XML namespaces, but some of them relying on the tag being "html:select" rather than doing processing of the xmlns attributes to figure out what the "html:" (or "xhtml:", etc.) prefix means. Except that in this case it's a more complicated thing than XML namespaces: the full RDF data model. -David -- ๐ L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ ๐ ๐ข Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ ๐ Before I built a wall I'd ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense. - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
