Skip to content

Issue #648: overly specific reason for not using relative URLs #651

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Issue #648: overly specific reason for not using relative URLs #651

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions ERRATA.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ This document includes errata for the [Activity Streams](https://www.w3.org/TR/a

## Activity Streams

- None yet reported.
- Section 2.2 "IRIs and URLs" says that publishers SHOULD NOT generate AS2 documents with relative IRI and URL references because JSON parser implementations may not conserve the base context to resolve relative references. This is overly specific; there are other types of implementations that may also fail to conserve the base context. One correction is to simply remove the reference to JSON parsers and replace it with "consumers": "Relative IRI (and URL) references SHOULD NOT be used within an Activity Streams 2.0 document due to the fact that many consumers are not capable of reliably preserving the base context necessary to properly resolve relative references."
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe replace "base context" with "base URI" ? As to avoid confusion with @context? So:

Suggested change
- Section 2.2 "IRIs and URLs" says that publishers SHOULD NOT generate AS2 documents with relative IRI and URL references because JSON parser implementations may not conserve the base context to resolve relative references. This is overly specific; there are other types of implementations that may also fail to conserve the base context. One correction is to simply remove the reference to JSON parsers and replace it with "consumers": "Relative IRI (and URL) references SHOULD NOT be used within an Activity Streams 2.0 document due to the fact that many consumers are not capable of reliably preserving the base context necessary to properly resolve relative references."
- Section 2.2 "IRIs and URLs" says that publishers SHOULD NOT generate AS2 documents with relative IRI and URL references because JSON parser implementations may not conserve the base context to resolve relative references. This is overly specific; there are other types of implementations that may also fail to conserve the base context. One correction is to simply remove the reference to JSON parsers and replace it with "consumers": "Relative IRI (and URL) references SHOULD NOT be used within an Activity Streams 2.0 document due to the fact that many consumers are not capable of reliably preserving the base URI necessary to properly resolve relative references."

We could also add a note that determining the base URI may have significant uncertainty between the implementations and different object structures you might receive. e.g., if an object has an @id but a relative IRI or URL with in, does that mean it's relative to that @id even if the parent object has a @base?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The language of "base URI" comes from RFC 3986, Section 5.2.1


## Activity Vocabulary

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -147,4 +147,4 @@ This document includes errata for the [Activity Streams](https://www.w3.org/TR/a
}
}
}
```
```