W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > July 2011

JSON-LD requirements

From: Bradley Allen <bradley.p.allen@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 06:31:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKpM4LmCdtg4TgPaJ-CY2caLeVvOGmEbgK+E3Hrav3hTK_x-_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Gregg- I think this is nicely done and a great contribution to
Monday's call, but I have some comments on terminology as it relates
to section 3.1.

In item 2 of the numbered list in that section, the phrase
"conceptional graph" appears; I assume that's a typo for the phrase
"conceptual graph", which is used in items 7 and 9.

That being said, I think the use of "conceptual graph" in this context
is problematic; that term is traditionally used to refer to the
formalism developed by John Sowa in his work on knowledge
representation, and implies a great deal more than I think you intend
here; see Berners-Lee's writing on the differences between the CG
formalism and RDF at http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CG.html. I would
suggest replacing "conceptual graph" with "directed graph", which I
believe communicates your intent precisely without any unintended KR
baggage. - FWIW, BPA

On Saturday, July 2, 2011, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com> wrote:
&gt; In order to try to reach some common ground, I put together a
JSON-LD requirements document [1]. My thought was that we could look
at the items point by point for the monday conference call to see
where we have common ground.
&gt; I've doubtless left off some requirements that other's would like
to see; if there's something you'd like to add let me know and I'll
update the doc.
&gt; Gregg
&gt; [1] http://json-ld.org/requirements/latest/

Bradley P. Allen
Received on Sunday, 3 July 2011 13:31:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:15 UTC