- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:53:24 +0200
- To: "'Ivan Herman'" <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, <public-linked-json@w3.org>
> I am worried about this. Of course, there may be situation where this > might be handy. But... I am, in general, afraid of building an RDF/XML > in JSON. What I mean is that having too much choices to express the > same things may lead to user confusion and, ultimately, rejection. I couldn't agree more and raised the same concern in last week's telecon. This specific issue was RESOLVED: Do not support embedding @contexts within a @context to re-define the IRI that a term maps to. [1] > My personal feeling is that we should have a feature freeze in JSON-LD > and, rather, look at every feature and variations with eagle eyes to > see if they are needed and, in case of doubt, remove them. I mostly agree with this as well. The only thing I think we should really consider is to make @container more powerful, see [2] and [3] for details but even there I'm not sure whether this really needs to go into JSON-LD 1.0. [1] https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/144#issuecomment-7209951 [2] https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/133 [3] https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/134 P.S.: Sorry for my last fat-fingered mail. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2012 10:53:52 UTC