Temporal context and vocab terms are forthcoming.
So I'm "bumping" this. Whatever that means. :)
This is blocked by my lack of time to finish the Leaflet plugin (#8). Question: power through that (I don't have time right now) or remove it from the checklist and continue? Running code is important, so I'm very hesitant to proceed without it.
@ekansa you've spoken to me before about putting a developer on a Leaflet plugin. Is that still possible?
@sgillies, I'd be happy to work on the Leaflet plugin. Would make a lot of sense given the talk I've proposed for SotM US, though my concerns there are temporal.
@erictheise Great! You want to try to pick up my pieces or start fresh? Up to you.
How about I decide after I look at the pieces, @sgillies?
@erictheise please! That would be fantastic!
@pietercolpaert what would you think about striking the Leaflet plugin off the list above and helping me with some examples? Maybe this thing can be shipped after all!
✋ I would be interested in helping too. At first the how to would be useful then maybe clearer for others to write implementations.
Js.geo would be a good venue to have this ready to 'announce'
@sgillies I'm afraid I'm a bit over-committed at this moment and can't make any promises. If nothing has moved fwd in the next months, I'll take a look at it in October.
@ajturner excellent. I've removed the Leaflet plugin from the list at the top of this issue.
Is this project still underway? I am interested in using the ld.geojson.org vocabulary.
Yes it is (@sgillies correct me if I am wrong) - but we are currently having GeoJSON RFC last call (exciting 👍 ), started work on GeoJSON Text Sequences, ... but we will continue to tackle the "linking" task. Maybe I can help more also with this, but at the moment do not want to risk over commitment ...
The project is overdue and it's time to wrap it up. I propose to complete the work by publishing the GeoJSON-LD and base context as-is, note the outstanding issue with GeoJSON coordinates, and call it "1.0." Please see http://geojson.org/geojson-ld for a preview of the 1.0 document.
If this is unsatisfactory, I'm also open to closing this project unfinished and letting another working group take up the work of defining a context and patching JSON-LD parsers so that they can handle nested GeoJSON coordinates.
👍 for moving forwards, and thank you for the hard work!
Also thank you for the id/@id, type/@type mapping. It's great to see this pattern being adopted.
@sgillies We all are unhappy with the issue of JSON-LD regarding coordinates. I am pretty certain that a revived JSON-LD WG would seriously attempt to resolve it.
Request for comments posted: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-linked-json/2017Jan/0001.html. Unless anyone finds a show stopper in the next week, I'll ship this on January 9.
Received comments and a 👍 from Gregg Kellogg. I've pushed a new date-tagged version to http://geojson.org/geojson-ld/.
Thanks Sean. I did some experiments using the new GeoJSON-LD contexts. Yes, the coordinates issue is super annoying. Hoping @akuckartz is right about getting solutions from the JSON-LD folks now that GeoJSON-LD adds some more motivating force.