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

RE: Yet another serialization format?

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:50:52 +0800
To: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000701cc364a$6cbbf980$4633ec80$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
> I think applying "out-of-band" annotations to "current"
> JSON is not what I mean by a graph representation. Each
> node has to have an ID. Otherwise you've got a tree.

"Out-of-band annotation" as you call it doesn't prevent every node to have an ID in any way. It's just a separation of concerns. Or did I miss something? It is just so that the description of how the representation has to be interpreted is stored in a different document. It's basically the machine-readable counterpart of descriptions as the following ones:

- https://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/api/album/
- https://developer.foursquare.com/docs/responses/user.html
- http://dev.twitter.com/doc/get/users/show

Since all of these APIs are RESTful every representation has an unique URI, by using a fragment identifier you could also link directly to subparts of such a JSON representation.
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 10:51:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:34 GMT