W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Use FOAF or schema.org in examples?

From: David I. Lehn <dil@lehn.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 18:16:11 -0500
Message-ID: <CADcbRROzRStpvTjOXzEZ8cj=GfFp=cGN+BvmvdGE=BG6DJjnrg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>, Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Markus Lanthaler
<markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 05, 2013 9:32 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>> > On 5 Feb 2013 11:03, "Gregg Kellogg" <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Feb 5, 2013, at 10:49 AM, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I noticed that Manu and Dave have been replacing most uses of FOAF in the
>> > > examples with Schema.org. On one hand, I find that good since probably more
>> > > people know about schema.org than about FOAF. On the other hand I find it
>> > > strange to use IRIs which do not resolve to anything useful when being
>> > > dereferenced; in fact, you'll get a 404.
>> >
>> > I think using schema.org makes it more relevant to developers. The fact that
>> > dereferencing a predicate IRI results in a 404 is a temporary issue, which I
>> > believe DanBri is addressing. So, in the long run, it shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> Yes, making per-property pages is on my list...
>
> Awesome. In that case, I think we should switch to schema.org in all examples to be consistent. If no one objects, I will do that in the next couple of days.
>

I have a soft objection.  While using schema.org for everything would
work, we could just as well use FOAF for every example.  It's not
clear to me why the JSON-LD spec should use schema.org based examples
at all when their site makes it hard to understand the properties we
are using.  I'd rather have examples that are easy to completely
understand.  Why not use something that is better documented now
rather than assume they will get around to documenting their
properties later?  It's also unclear why we would want to promote
schema.org when it looks like they are just trying to slurp together
everything into one-vocab-to-rule-them-all.  A nice feature of JSON-LD
is that it lets you link together data using multiple specialized
vocabs.  Perhaps it would be good to highlight that in our examples
and specifically use various well documented vocabs.

-dave
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 23:16:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:39 GMT