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

Tombstone "formerType" Property Range Needs Clarification #440

Open
2 of 5 tasks
cjslep opened this issue Jan 1, 2018 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #455
Open
2 of 5 tasks

Tombstone "formerType" Property Range Needs Clarification #440

cjslep opened this issue Jan 1, 2018 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #455

Comments

@cjslep
Copy link

cjslep commented Jan 1, 2018

Please Indicate One:

  • Editorial
  • Question
  • Feedback
  • Blocking Issue
  • Non-Blocking Issue

Please Describe the Issue:

(I am splitting my email to the public-socialweb mailing list into separate issues, for background please see those emails).

This is ActivityStream vocabulary specific: https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary

The Tombstone "formerType" property lists "Object" as its range, but based on examples it looks like it should have the same range as the "type" property, which is anyURI. That is, it is unclear what putting an entire "Object" type into the "formerType" property would effectively mean.

gobengo pushed a commit to gobengo/activitystreams that referenced this issue Jan 24, 2018
@gobengo gobengo linked a pull request Jan 24, 2018 that will close this issue
@evanp evanp self-assigned this Jun 21, 2023
@evanp
Copy link
Collaborator

evanp commented Jun 21, 2023

I think @gobengo 's patch is probably the correct way to deal with this issue. It adds support for xsd:anyURI, but does not remove Object as a potential range. That will allow the correct use (a type id) in this property, but not make unusable any existing implementations that use Object instead.

I propose merging @gobengo 's patch.

@bumblefudge
Copy link

(Discussed on today's SWIGCG call)
+1 I think it's standard procedure to do what Ben's proposing in cases where document/code/schemata are accidentally more constrictive than (or don't match) spec requirements, i.e. allow intended behavior (in this case, anyURI but ideally valid types only) but not break implementations already built with unintended behavior (in this case, putting in a whole object).

I would also recommend renaming this issue and leaving it open in case a new version of AP spec gets chartered down the road, as the unintended behavior should be deprecated in future spec and removed from future Context.

ryanatkn added a commit to ryanatkn/corpus-activity-streams that referenced this issue Jul 21, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants