ActivityStream extension process

[yookoala]

If we agree to extend ActivityPub for git federation, we'd need to specify the context on how we'd add vocabs to the ActivityStream.

The ActivityPub community group is drafting an extension process.
Things are still under discussion and we'll have to wait for the finalized version.
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/wiki/Extension-process

Based on the current draft, this is probably what we have to do in the development process:

Multiple-implementation extensions still in development

For when we're experimenting with new problem areas that need new vocabulary terms, but we're not quite sure about them yet. For these, we should:

• Declare it with a Github issue

• use some kind of sub-namespace of AS2 (https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams/dating# or https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#dating?)

• Implementors use the namespace in their contexts and the namespaced values in their documents:

   {
       "@context": ["https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams/",
       {"dating": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams/dating#"}],
       "type": "Person",
       "dating:seekingGender": "any",
       "dating:geographicalRestrictions": {
           "dating:within": "50km",
           "dating:of": "https://places.example/New_York_City"
       }
   }

[yookoala]

Related to #2.

[yookoala]

@cwebber: Please correct me if I represented it wrong. (OMG. So many typo. I should sleep now)

[yookoala]

The SocialCG meeting also talked about having a formal w3c work group for this specification. Or even host discussion within the existing ActivityPub work group.

[gobengo]

I think it best to start development of extensions with a URL prefix that is under a non-w3 domain, develop it far enough that there are real-world implementations, and only then (if ever) propose aliasing it to something under the AS2 namespace, which the W3C Social CG should do by consensus or other voting scheme.

[yookoala]

Agreed,