Can ACL docs be in JSON-LD? about web-access-control-spec HOT 8 CLOSED

@timbl Could your script be extended to do that?

from web-access-control-spec.

I want JSON-LD too.

from web-access-control-spec.

WAC does not need to require more than one concrete RDF syntax. Only Turtle is required for interop. Requiring any additional syntax increases the complexity on the WAC-spec level. Servers implementing a protocol that supports JSON-LD (and/or other syntaxes) can do so.

Unless there is a compelling reason for WAC to support other syntaxes, I suggest to close this issue.

from web-access-control-spec.

I think this issue was about vocab not the representation of ACLs in given ecosystem.

from web-access-control-spec.

hah! oops, I've totally lazy-misread that.

Source is acl.n3 . I don't see a particular reason not to have a JSON-LD representation... will followup with Tim/Eric.

from web-access-control-spec.

I'm confused.

To my eyes, it looks like @elf-pavlik misread the original post. I don't see a question about vocab, but about whether JSON-LD representations of ACLs could be supported -- where TTL, RDF/XML, and N3 already are. ...

I also don't see how @csarven's latest addresses a vocab question, when you're going to follow up with people about delivering a JSON-LD representation of an N3 resource ... but it does seem to be addressing the original question.

Have I lost the plot somewhere?

from web-access-control-spec.

@TallTed

I can see that there are two things being conflated. The title of the issue:

Can ACL docs be in JSON-LD?

and the following line caused the confusion:

Since LDP officially supports JSON-LD as a 'SHOULD', it feels like the WAC spec should too, right? But when trying to write unit test for ACL docs in JSON-LD format, I ran into this problem:

because they they have nothing to do with what follows:

curl -H "Accept: application/ld+json" http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl

Should we ask the webmasters of w3.org to publish a JSON-LD representation of http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl?

I overlooked some details in my original comment hence the reason why I thought it is about the ACL resource as opposed to the ACL ontology.

@michielbdejong ? :)

from web-access-control-spec.

Sorry, I didn't remember the details but if you follow the link to inrupt/wac-ldp#45 (comment) and inrupt/wac-ldp@78a40a7 that gives some more info.

So while we could still ask the webmasters of w3.org to publish a JSON-LD representation of http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl, the answer to this issue is of course "yes, they can". And as long as clients don't try to retrieve http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl to get context, all is fine!

from web-access-control-spec.