RE: JSON-LD graph should be an RDF graph

Thanks for the feedback David. However, if I recall correctly, we were
explicitly instructed to make those changes. The reasoning was to introduce
explicit terminology for JSON-LD since the data model is not exactly the
same. That's also the reason why we now have a detailed data model section.

Btw. the version you were looking at is more than half a year old. You
should either look directly at

  http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-syntax/

or at the latest time-stamped version which is

  http://json-ld.org/spec/FCGS/json-ld-syntax/20130222/


> Appendix B suggests that JSON-LD is intended
> to be an RDF format, but this should be stated explicitly in the
> definition.

Where exactly would you like to see that statement being made?


Thanks,
Markus


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler




> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Booth [mailto:david@dbooth.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 11:25 PM
> To: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
> Subject: JSON-LD graph should be an RDF graph
> 
> A comment on
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-json-ld-syntax-20120712/
> 
> The definition of "Linked Data" does not say that a linked data graph
> is
> an RDF graph.  I think it is important to state explicitly that a
> linked
> data graph is an RDF graph.  Otherwise JSON-LD would be a competitor to
> RDF (since both are used to represent directed graphs) but without
> being
> grounded on RDF semantics.  Appendix B suggests that JSON-LD is
> intended
> to be an RDF format, but this should be stated explicitly in the
> definition.
> 
> Thanks,
> David

Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 22:58:41 UTC