- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 10:07:43 +0100
- To: Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>
- Cc: Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
On 6 Apr 2011, at 09:47, Bob Ferris wrote: > Hi Chris, [snip] > I'm not aware of any OWL2/JSON serialization. However, I'm wondering whether this is really necessary, since OWL can be represented via the knowledge representation structure RDF Model quite well. "Quite well" really depends on your taste and application. The RDF serialization is, in my experience, infelicitous for various purposes, at least for me. The goal would be to have something closer to the abstract model defined in the structural specification. (This is similar to the motivation for having an XML serialization that reflects the abstract model.) > Today there are multiple proposals for RDF/JSON serialization (see [1]) available and the new RDF WG is working on a standard recommendation. Maybe you should wait for this. > What are the benefits of having a separate OWL2/JSON serialization format? If you intend to work with OWL ontologies via the abstract model, it removes a level of indirection (indeed, it removes a complex parsing layer). Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 09:08:08 UTC