Compile list of design choices motivated by compatibility with AS1

w3c / activitystreams

Activity Streams 2.0

https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/

Other

284 stars 60 forks source link

Compile list of design choices motivated by compatibility with AS1 #14

Closed elf-pavlik closed 9 years ago

elf-pavlik commented 10 years ago

During our last telecon @jasnell mentioned a design choice motivated by intention to keep backward compatibility with AS1. I would find it useful to understand what other design choices come out of this motivation.

jasnell: JSON-LD implies both the JSON syntax and a particular processing model, and the @id kind of stuff. For backward compatibility, AS2 did not go there. ... AS2 does not say that it is JSON-LD, but here is a set of guidelines for how to process it as JSON-LD. ... Important distinction elf-pavlik: i understand backward compatibility to AS1

-- https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-09-minutes

not requiring IRI for values of as:verb https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/23#issuecomment-58833788

elf-pavlik commented 10 years ago

answered in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2014Sep/0086.html

I took some time this past week to have a detailed conversation with Arnaud, reviewing IBM's goals around Activity Streams and determining exactly what our requirements are. That discussion settled on one very specific point: although we have product shipping today that uses the Activity Streams 1.0 syntax, maintaining forwards or backwards compatibility with that syntax in whatever this WG produces is not a critical requirement for us. - James M Snell

akuckartz commented 10 years ago

That compatibility with AS 1.0 is not a critical requirement for IBM is a very important information.

jasnell commented 10 years ago

I would qualify this by saying that while backwards compatibility is not a critical requirement, breaking changes just for the sake of change are just a bad idea. Right now things are defined such that valid AS 1.0 documents are still valid 2.0 documents, that's valuable IMO.

elf-pavlik commented 10 years ago

I must say that I find it truly mindblowing :bomb: how you manage to marry AS1.0 and JSON-LD via AS2.0 :exclamation: Let's try ASAP get some real world AS1.0 documents, parse them as JSON-LD and look at RDF graphs we get :microscope:

elf-pavlik commented 10 years ago

@jasnell @evanp can you please point me to few examples of AS1.0, out in the wild, which we could use for testing with current AS2.0 JSON-LD context?