Okay since I don't seem to have enough energy for the serious things I have to do, time to start this thread on "Hawkeish Names", and how they could help extensions to ActivityStreams (the vocab used by ActivityPub) and other projects, allowing decentralized terminology with some collaboration without requiring a central authority to "ok" a term or requiring being able to maintain a namespace.
Thread below, I'll eventually turn it into a blogpost or ActivityPub issue.
First, let's lay out how things work now. A lot of people wonder why json-ld has a context. Well, english is imprecise, and in an open world system we need to be careful about what terms we mean. For example, imagine two ActivityPub implementors adding "run" a program and "run" a mile extensions, and how to know which term is used?
The json-ld context maps shorter human-readable terms to more precise URIs. Eg "Follow" becomes "http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Follow" which is a more precise URI.
Okay now we can easily understand, we can map new terms to new vocabularies etc. Except vocabularies are hard to maintain, they spread out, and are generally a pain in the ass.
And what about adding extensions to existing vocabularies? The SocialCG has spent about 9 months hemming and hawing about how or if to extend ActivityStreams. That sucks. Can we do something better?
@sandro made a suggestion earlier which I'll call "Hawke Names", from which "Hawkeish Names" are derived. Sandro's suggestions is: the actual important definition of a term isn't the short version of the term, but the paragraph long definition of your term from the specification and use that as your key. So in this case, name would be "A simple, human-readable, plain-text name for the object. HTML markup MUST NOT be included. The name MAY be expressed using multiple
Except *nobody's* going to want to have every key in their json document bloat 20x so that's not going to happen. So here's where I diverge from @sandro who thinks this is an "optimization", but I think is pretty key: you hash the document and use that as a hash-based URN (a kind of content-addressed URI). Just to show sha1 (yeah I know) the key would look like: urn:sha1:fa53084596e3e1c04b37441b70ad0e6d90907163
@cwebber @npd You somewhat mischaracterized my proposal. I wasn't suggesting one use the definition text every place in the data you need to refer to the definition. Instead, you use a URI like now, but you connect it rigidly to the definition, so that different URIs can clearly refer to the same thing.
Fairly concrete proposal at https://sandhawke.github.io/mov/
The schemove implementation isn't quite done.
@npd @cwebber Certainly if there's anything imperfect :-) about movable-schemas it'd be nice to document/discuss in issues there. Then if there's an alternative, we could start talking about it there, sure.
The problem is Chris proposed an alternative to strawman, so I don't know where to begin.
Also, Chris, if you want feedback on your proposal, maybe make a repo for it?
I'll have to re-read what you wrote, I'm happy for feedback on what I wrote even if it's not the same thing
I'll write up my proposal on the AP issue tracker anyway when I get some time to breathe
For people involved in the activities of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), in Working Groups or Community Groups, and people who follow the work of the W3C. Run on a volunteer basis by Sandro Hawke and others, NOT the W3C systems team, and NOT supported by W3C. Uses the W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. A place to talk online about the things you would talk about in a meeting, or at a meal with your group. We plan to have a relay-bot soon, so don't feel like you need an account here to be a member of this online community. Please post things you think the W3C community might find interesting!