Re: JSON-LD requirements

On Jul 3, 2011, at 6:31 AM, "Bradley Allen" <bradley.p.allen@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.

Yes, thanks.

> 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

There's always a danger in minting terms that you might confuse the concept with something else; I'll take your suggestion, and use "directed graph".

> 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;
> &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;
> &gt; Gregg
> &gt;
> &gt; [1] http://json-ld.org/requirements/latest/
> &gt;
> 
> 
> -- 
> Bradley P. Allen
> http://bradleypallen.org

Gregg

Received on Sunday, 3 July 2011 14:42:52 UTC