Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

#81 The YAML-LD Primer #82

Closed

Conversation

anatoly-scherbakov
Copy link
Contributor

@anatoly-scherbakov anatoly-scherbakov commented Aug 28, 2022

This is very much a draft.

I decided to push it however to show how we maybe could visualize RDF graphs.

image

This image is generated using Cytoscape JS library. The nodes and edges should be clickable. What do you think of the idea itself?

Perhaps there is some off-the-shelf JS visualization tool for RDF that we could use?


Preview | Diff

@anatoly-scherbakov anatoly-scherbakov self-assigned this Aug 28, 2022
@anatoly-scherbakov anatoly-scherbakov changed the base branch from main to issue-73-how-to-read-this-document August 28, 2022 13:57
@anatoly-scherbakov anatoly-scherbakov marked this pull request as draft August 28, 2022 13:59
Copy link
Member

@gkellogg gkellogg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I say go ahead and merge it; the standards for a CG Report are different than that for a WG.

The playground has a visualization tool, although I'm sure there are better.

For Specs, there may be some restrictions on having active content on the page, but with appropriate use of CSS media selectors, it seems fine to me.

@TallTed
Copy link
Contributor

TallTed commented Aug 28, 2022

I would expect this to eventually be published as a non-normative a/k/a informative NOTE, so there's probably little point to keeping this PR of a new document in draft, nor even in keeping this as a PR, once @anatoly-scherbakov feels comfortable opening it up to full review and input by/from CG and/or WG.

Active content is neither globally forbidden nor globally permitted, especially in NOTE space. It should be carefully considered, as many people prefer to print things, but when used well, I think it may fit well into a Primer or similar NOTE.

@anatoly-scherbakov
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TallTed I agree that, if done, this document must be non normative.

I am not entirely clear though whether you propose to factor this out as a separate document right away? Instead of having it as part of the spec for the time being.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member

Looks like this got lost, as it targets a branch already merged. You may need a new PR to re-target it.

@TallTed
Copy link
Contributor

TallTed commented Aug 29, 2022

@anatoly-scherbakov -- To my mind, having the Primer treated as its own doc (doesn't need to be a separate repo) from inception is best. Given that #80 (which holds the branch you forked from) has been merged, requiring this to be rebased against main at minimum, I'd suggest that you break into that distinct doc now.

@ioggstream
Copy link
Contributor

having the Primer treated as its own doc (doesn't need to be a separate repo) from inception is best

+1 to integrate in a separate repo, unless there's specific need to visually represent a graph to clarify the spec content.

Didn't know cytoscape. Looks cool.

@anatoly-scherbakov anatoly-scherbakov deleted the issue-81-primer branch June 8, 2024 11:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants