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

Re: Branding?

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:25:41 -0400
Message-ID: <4E30E4C5.2070402@openlinksw.com>
To: public-linked-json@w3.org
> On 07/27/2011 08:47 PM, Nathan wrote:
>> Dave Longley wrote:
>>> On 07/27/2011 01:48 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> How about:
>>>>
>>>> 1. JSON-*D   -- in some form courtesy of Alex's post re. blank 
>>>> nodes accomodation
>>>>
>>>> 2. JSONG  -- JSON Graphs (it does have rhythm to it)
>>>>
>>>> 3. JSON-XD -- "X" is whatever you want to make of it without 
>>>> breaking anything via conflation .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have thought about something that indicates "Graphs in JSON" 
>>> before, so if we must rename the spec then something along the lines 
>>> of JSONG would be alright with me. The only problem, in particular 
>>> with JSONG, is that it is difficult to differentiate it from JSON 
>>> when pronounced, if pronounced "JAY-SONG".
>>>
>>
>> We do need to remember that it's only a particular kind of graph 
>> though, a labelled di-graph. Mentioning because there will be lots of 
>> other people passing over generic graphs in JSON for use with charts 
>> and diagrams, who may easily get confused if we go down the "graphs 
>> in JSON" route.
>>
>> Interestingly, Labelled Directed Graph also reduces to LD / LDG.
>
> That might be a good compromise. JSON, Labeled and Directed: JSON-LD. 
> And it's easy to remember that if you want to express Linked Data in 
> JSON, you use JSON-LD -- even if that isn't strictly the origin of its 
> name.
>

That's fine for sure! It certainly kills off the Linked Data confusion 
potential. It's also compatible with Linked Data being the end product 
of a *kind* of directed graph re. whole data representation.

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 04:26:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:53:17 UTC