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: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 10:16:24 +0200
To: "'public-rdf-comments'" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <009101ce6745$22c62b60$68528220$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:09 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2013, at 7:02 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> > So, you are raising a new point then. You want the data model section to
> > replaced with a statement saying that JSON-LD serializes the "RDF['s
> > model with two generalizations" citing terHorst for the
> > "bnodes-for-predicates generalization".
> No doubt that would not fly, so I will not attempt it. But how about
> adding a sentence something like this to appendix A, end of first
> paragraph:
> "These definitions correspond closely, both in terminology and in
> general structure, to the abstract syntax of RDF datasets and RDF
> graphs."

I would certainly be fine with this. I would also suggest to append the
following sentence to your proposal

  Complete details of how JSON-LD relates to RDF are in
  C. Relationship to RDF.

If no one objects, I will go ahead and implement these changes.

Markus Lanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 08:16:57 UTC

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