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

On Jun 11, 2013, at 9:00 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:

> On 06/10/2013 11:49 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> I think there may be other positive outcomes.    Without getting into
>> them, I think there might be a compromise in mentioning RDF toward the
>> beginning in a very careful way that preserves some distance and does
>> not make people feel they should go off and read about RDF.  Something
>> like this in the Introduction:
>> 
>>    JSON-LD was designed to be compatible with Semantic Web technologies
>>    like RDF and SPARQL.  People intending to use JSON-LD with RDF tools
>>    will find it can be used as another RDF syntax, like Turtle. 
>>    Complete details of how JSON-LD relates to RDF are in Appendix C.
> 
> +0.5, I could live with something like this.

+1. So could I.  (Though do we want to imply that JSON-LD is *not* a semantic web technology? Maybe this is deliberate? I cannot follow the devious politics apparently required in the JSON world.)

Pat

> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Meritora - Web payments commercial launch
> http://blog.meritora.com/launch/
> 
> 

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 04:02:04 UTC