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

RE: JSON-LD Java Implementation feedback.

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:50:58 +0800
To: "'Linked JSON'" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Cc: "'Fabian Christ'" <christ.fabian@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <019701cc922a$1083da20$318b8e60$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
> Another point is that I always thought that JSON-LD should be easy to
> interpret for people who are not that familiar with semantic web
> technologies. It should be just JSON with extras. For those people, it
> should be really easy to forget the @context and just grab the needed
> values from the properties. But now there are these complex rules for
> IRIs with and without prefixes that adds complexity. And you can only
> understand this when reading the spec really carefully. One step to
> make parsing easier would be the solution with @prefix and @token. It
> just makes a complicated rule easy to understand.

It's difficult to say what will be easier for people :-) But you are right. CURIEs (which we know just call prefixes for simplicity) where one of the most controversial topics. That's also the reason why we classified them as an Advanced Concept.
I personally think that prefixes won't be used that often in JSON-LD anyway. Most people will stick to simple terms for JSON keys as they do now. I have yet to come across a JSON document using namespaces.


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 24 October 2011 08:51:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:35 GMT