IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] NEW RELATION: property and context

"Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> Tue, 28 May 2013 23:26 UTC

Return-Path: <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7950321F8AF4 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2013 16:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.929, BAYES_20=-0.74, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id brtA5AuDzoyG for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2013 16:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75D1421F896B for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2013 16:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.34]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MNfPA-1Uob5l2Eaw-007Hjp for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 May 2013 01:26:43 +0200
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 May 2013 23:26:43 -0000
Received: from 84-115-182-43.dynamic.surfer.at (EHLO Vostro3500) [84.115.182.43] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 29 May 2013 01:26:43 +0200
X-Authenticated: #419883
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+w4y5H7uCwG1lYaliZ3XtNKyr8bucMua7FHBZifK MdT1BLPP2/ifEE
From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
To: 'James M Snell' <jasnell@gmail.com>
References: <4038B5FE76874C54A819A07FE192AEF8@gmail.com> <CABP7Rbd815stpCPLL5q9eVuxbHDW6NbGrBPdfjJbSywKFRRJ4g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABP7Rbd815stpCPLL5q9eVuxbHDW6NbGrBPdfjJbSywKFRRJ4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 01:26:47 +0200
Message-ID: <02c301ce5bfa$d3631240$7a2936c0$@lanthaler>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac5b+HfI5BH1eqlzTSK/hm/Qd2jNPwAAgYfg
Content-Language: de
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: link-relations@ieft.org, 'IETF Apps Discuss' <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] NEW RELATION: property and context
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 23:26:50 -0000

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:09 AM, James M Snell wrote:
> Based on an initial review (and a few days to process)... The
> "context" link relation seems somewhat useful, "property" not so much.
> 
> "context" is useful for things like processing json-ld. That strikes
> me as being good.

James, did you read all the discussion? Ioseb made it quite clear that his
"context" is intended to be used completely different than JSON-LD's
context. I'm still not sure I understand its semantics.



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status