Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Normativeness of the embedded form of JSON-LD #22

Closed
iherman opened this issue Jul 1, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Normativeness of the embedded form of JSON-LD #22

iherman opened this issue Jul 1, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@iherman
Copy link
Member

iherman commented Jul 1, 2018

Section 4.28 of the draft defines JSON-LD embedded in HTML via the script tag. However, the section is marked as 'non-normative'.

In view of the importance of that format (e.g., this is the main format accepted by schema.org processors these days) we should consider giving it a normative status.

@azaroth42
Copy link
Contributor

Is there a difference between this issue and #57?

@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Aug 24, 2018

Not really. Except that #57 says

We've discussed making this normative, requiring JSON-LD processors to be able to identify and extract JSON-LD from a script tag with type application/ld+json within the HTML document.

Ie, it discusses details to be decided upon provided this issue is accepted, ie, there is a resolution to turn that section in normative.

Maybe voting on this could be done by email, we can then close it and concentrate on #57 if the decision is a 'yes'.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member

Is there a difference between this issue and #57?

Not really, my mistake for duplicating.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member

Agree we can close this, and then work on the details in #57, and we may need to break out the different points into separate issues.

@azaroth42
Copy link
Contributor

👍 Closing, duplicate.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants