Re: FYI: Interesting dicussion over at rest-discuss

On 1/10/12 9:55 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>> It's the narrative itself, the problem is that from the Semantic Web
>> and
>> W3C side of things an EAV based directed graph that leverages URIs ==
>> RDF. Thus, even when speaking of the aforementioned model (no syntax in
>> mind) they say: RDF. The biggest problem is that when people outside of
>> the Semantic Web and W3C encounter the letters R-D-F they triangulate
>> straight to the RDF/XML and all of its problems.
>>
>> It's a nightmare, to put things mildly :-(
> Maybe moving the theoretical Linked Data definition [1] towards the end of
> the spec and describing the data model based on object oriented programming
> where pointers are IRIs would help to improve the situation slightly. What
> do you think?
>
>
> [1] http://www.json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-syntax/#linked-data
>
>
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
>
>
>
>
>
>
Markus,

Linked Data isn't the problem, good effort was put into ensuring the 
Linked Data == RDF misinformation didn't overshadow JSON-LD. As per 
usual, the problem is more complex.

Proof:

1. open up the json-ld spec page (your URL above)
2. CTRL-F to perform a search and count of occurrences for pattern: RDF, 
you get 67 !

Look at the opening paragraph. "RDF" has colonized the blurb-space of 
this spec, in a nutshell. It's the effects of said colonization that 
leads people outside the Semantic Web and Linked Data communities to 
these frustrating conclusions that you've encountered :-(


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen