W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > June 2013

RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data)

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:02:04 +0200
To: "'public-rdf-comments'" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <019201ce668a$bbb62700$33227500$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Tuesday, June 11, 2013 9:08 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
> But my main concern is not about how early the RDF connection is
> spelled out, but that it does get stated clearly and unambiguously and
> normatively in the specification document *somewhere*. This is after
> all a *standards specification*, not a propaganda or advertising
> effort. (Or a "for dummies" tutorial.) It needs to state the facts
> clearly and unambiguously, and to clearly state the relationships to
> other standards. To re-define the RDF data model, calling it by another
> name, and not stating that it is a re-statement of the RDF abstract
> graph syntax, is just wrong. It is *deliberately* misleading; it is in
> fact a form of lying.

We were asked by members of the RDF WG to add this section. In fact, Richard
wrote most of it, I just completed it because he got busy otherwise. There
why reason it is there, is because the data models are not exactly the same.
JSON-LD allows bnodes for graph labels and predicates wheras RDF's data
model does not.

Markus Lanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 10:02:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:57 UTC