- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 09:25:14 -0700
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: RDF Working Group <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@gmail.com>
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: > Tab, Anne, Robin, > > This is a response to your Last Call comment on the JSON-LD API. The > issue is being tracked here: > > http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/125 > > Each of you had suggested that the JSON-LD API should use Futures > instead of node.js-style continuation callbacks. The JSON-LD group > debated the topic here: > > http://json-ld.org/minutes/2013-04-16/#topic-2 > > and here: > > http://json-ld.org/minutes/2013-04-23/#topic-1 > > and here: > > http://json-ld.org/minutes/2013-04-30/#topic-2 > > In the end, the JSON-LD group agreed that if the direction of the Web > platform is Futures, that the API should align with that direction. The > JSON-LD API is now completely Future's based: > > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/json-ld/raw-file/default/spec/WD/json-ld-api/20130514/index.html > > The group believes that this addresses each of your concerns regarding > the asynchronous API style used for JSON-LD 1.0. > > Please respond to this e-mail as soon as possible to confirm that you > are happy with the changes. +1
Received on Thursday, 9 May 2013 16:26:05 UTC