W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Requirements update

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 19:51:20 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFNgM+ayQHNc=GnEnzOKjWyZ4pe9T1BdDVvn-+una5Rw8VP+Jg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Cc: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On 9 August 2011 18:24, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com> wrote:
> We discussed the requirements [1] on the call today. I made a couple of
> small changes, but I mainly wanted to get feedback from the list on the
> specific JSON-LD markup requirements:
> A JSON-LD document must be able to express a linked data graph.

Good stuff. Nitpic time.

Q: What is the definition of a "linked data graph"?

e.g. If my datamodel consists of ordered n-tuples, such that:

a) these 4-tuples:

*) uri-1 author uri-2 "John Smith"
*) uri-1 author uri-3 "Alice Example"



*) uri-1 author uri-3 "Alice Example"
*) uri-1 author uri-2 "John Smith"

...capture a meaningful difference, does the requirement for a "linked
data graph" include respecting such aspects of my data model? Or the
fact I'm using 4-tuple representations rather than 3-tuple?

The draft reads like an attempt to describe RDF's abstract data model
without naming it, or perhaps, without hooking it into associated
perceived complexities. That's fine, but if so the doc needs to say "a
linked data graph is ..." ... and then complete the definition either
inline or by reference.

The version I see in http://json-ld.org/requirements/latest/ does have
such language, "A linked data graph is a labeled directed graph, where
nodes are subjects or objects, and edges are properties."; is the WWW
version older or newer than the copy mailed here?


Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 17:51:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:53:18 UTC