From the "specifications are hard" department: @bz_moz takes a closer look at the JSON-LD spec draft. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=991521#c4 …
-
-
Replying to @tschneidereit
@tschneidereit Of course asking us to then implement the non-normative no-one-reviewed this stuff is pretty great...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @really_bz
@bz_moz Also, "the parts that we might [..] be using to expose the behavior are [..] non-normative" makes "non-normative" pretty meaningless2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tschneidereit
@tschneidereit Well, it's a good way to avoid the requirement for having implementations before going to REC. Assuming that's a goal.1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @really_bz
@bz_moz This tweet is mean in so many ways, and yet... :-)@tschneidereit1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DavidBruant
@DavidBruant@tschneidereit I'm having a hard time understanding the thinking that led to the spec state _and_ a request to implement.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @really_bz
@bz_moz Don't get me wrong, I very much agree with you and@tschneidereit. Lots of people still believe W3C carries authority on the web.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@DavidBruant @tschneidereit My confusion here is with the WG members, not the W3C.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.