W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > May 2012

Re: JSON-LD Syntax request for FPWD via RDF WG

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 02:12:54 +0100
Cc: RDF Comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>, Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-Id: <EFF5961B-0CF1-4B0C-97AB-1F5CFB9A64F9@cyganiak.de>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
On 24 May 2012, at 01:58, Manu Sporny wrote:
> The JSON model is capable of round-tripping the RDF model. The RDF model
> is not capable of round-tripping the JSON model.

That should not be an issue  trying to round-trip HTML+RDFa loses the pure-HTML parts too, for example.

> In order for the RDF
> model to support round-tripping the JSON model - it would have to
> support null-able subjects

What's that? Just property-value pairs without a subject?

> and it would have to support plain literal predicates.

Right. Why not just stick them onto the end of some standard namespace?

> I would be fine with this language:
> 
> JSON-LD is a language that is capable of expressing the RDF model and
> performing full JSON-LD to RDF to JSON-LD round-tripping.

Shouldn't that be RDF to JSON-LD to RDF?

So how about: JSON-LD is a language capable of serializing any RDF graph, and performing full RDF to JSON-LD to RDF round-tripping.

Best,
Richard



> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: PaySwarm Website for Developers Launched
> http://digitalbazaar.com/2012/02/22/new-payswarm-alpha/
> 
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 01:13:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 24 May 2012 01:13:26 GMT