-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 103
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
Add warnings related to @vocab
usage
#1524
Conversation
index.html
Outdated
While this specification warns against the usage of `@vocab`, there are | ||
legitimate usages of the feature, such as to ease experimentation, development, | ||
and localized deployment. If an application developer desires to use `@vocab` in | ||
production, which is strongly advised against, they are urged to understand that |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
production, which is strongly advised against, they are urged to understand that | |
production, which is advised against, they are urged to understand that |
perhaps something like
production, which is strongly advised against, they are urged to understand that | |
production, which is advised against to reduce term collisions and leverage the benefits of semantic interoperability, they are urged to understand that |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When I pulled in @TallTed's change suggestions, it invalidated this one, can you please re-raise it on the updated text so you get credit for the change?
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> Co-authored-by: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
the semantics of the terms that are used by their application. Applications MAY | ||
use JSON-LD <a data-cite="JSON-LD11-API#compaction-algorithms">compaction | ||
algorithms</a> to transform a document that uses an unknown JSON-LD context | ||
to one that does not, so the new document's terms will match expectations. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some additional detail might be needed, with the addition of that sentence. I think this, because I don't know (and I haven't been able to figure it out, after more than a few minutes reading the linked page and others. I had thought I had a good grasp of JSON-LD mechanics, but this makes me wonder!) how the suggested transformation would work. Maybe add some more-descriptive, psuedo-algorithmic language here, with fewer low-level details than the linked page?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm thinking that this statement is going to require it's own section. Both in the Data Integrity spec, and possibly in the VCDM spec. People seem to be requesting it over here (see item 3): w3c/vc-data-integrity#272 (comment)
If we get consensus to do item 3 (above), then I expect we'll dedicate a section to that sentence. So, we can take it out for now, or leave it in and expand upon it later. I'm fine either way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Either will work for me, for now, if a tracking issue is opened before/upon merge of this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is now being tracked in #1529
Co-authored-by: Gabe <7622243+decentralgabe@users.noreply.github.com>
Editorial, multiple reviews, changes requested and made, @TallTed's concern tracked in a new issue, no objections, merging. |
This PR is a partial attempt to address issue #1514 by warning about the usage of
@vocab
, including guidance on when it might be acceptable to use it.Preview | Diff