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

Re: LinkedData != RDF ?

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 11:15:35 -0400
Message-ID: <4DD68597.1060708@openlinksw.com>
To: public-linked-json@w3.org
On 5/20/11 8:56 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> On 20 May 2011 14:31, William Waites<ww@styx.org>  wrote:
>> * [2011-05-19 16:37:07 -0400] Gregg Kellogg<gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>  écrit:
>> ] * The model should be based on the notion of graphs, similar to RDF, but
>> ] where the semantics are more Class/Object based, rather than predicate
>> ] based. (i.e., I define a class definition with specific properties and
>> ] class inheritance/implements more similar to Ruby/Python, rather then
>> ] being predicate based.
>> I'm not sure this is such a good idea.
> Me neither. RDF takes control away from schemas, allowing multiple
> schemas to be mixed-in when describing some object, without need for
> permission, anticipation or coordination from the original schema
> writers. And when that results in too many namespaces at instance
> level, you can always create an indirection schema that defines
> subclasses/subproperties of common terms so that instance data can use
> a single flat namespace instead. Seems easier than throwing away the
> base level and starting from scratch...
> Dan

Just to be clear, me neither. So +1 re. comments above.

We want the Logic in the Data via Linked Data Structures constructed 
using Hyperlinks. This can be achieved using JSON just as its been 
achieved using XML, and (X)HTML re. Linked Data.

Programming languages can deal webby linked data however they choose, 
most already support HTTP so they're already en route re. HTTP based 
Linked Data :-)



Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Friday, 20 May 2011 15:15:57 UTC

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