3 ms·
The W3C has a proven track record to produce overengineered shit when it comes to "the semantic web". Just look at ActivityPub. It's essentially OStatus but in
by sascha_sl 8y ago
The W3C has a proven track record to produce overengineered shit when it comes to "the semantic web".
Just look at ActivityPub. It's essentially OStatus but instead of XML we slapped namespaces on JSON, wrote a bunch of overly complex preprocessing procedures so that everyone can output just the way they want[1] and still made half the spec ambiguous enough[2] that implements essentially follow the one rule that matters, maintain compatibility with Mastodon.
[1]: https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld-api/#algorithm-5 https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld-api/#algorithm-5
[2]: https://please-just-end.me/ap.html#block-activity-outbox https://please-just-end.me/ap.html#block-activity-outbox (domain name relevant to content)
- zozbot123 8y agoThe Semantic Web does not require XML these days. JSON-LD (for JSON) and GRDDL/Microdata (for HTML) are widely-acknowledged standards. For simple text use, akin to a Markdown-formatted document, you can use Turtle. If you believe that JSON-LD is genuinely ambiguous, take it to the authors of that spec and contribute to getting it fixed.
- sascha_sl 8y agoDo you think a format that requires this amount of code to predictably parse is a good format? https://github.com/kazarena/json-gold/blob/master/ld/api_normalize.go https://github.com/kazarena/json-gold/blob/master/ld/api_nor...