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: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 09:50:47 -0500
Cc: "'public-rdf-comments'" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1168033E-8AB0-40D3-A19E-122E148B76C6@ihmc.us>
To: "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>

On Jun 12, 2013, at 3:12 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:

> On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 6:02 AM, Pat Hayes 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.)
> 
> You probably didn't have a look at the changes Manu mentioned yesterday.

I hadn't when I typed that, no. But now I have and I like the new paragraph, below, a lot. So +2.

Pat

> This is what we ended up ending to the spec:
> 
>  JSON-LD was designed to be usable by developers as idiomatic JSON,
>  with no need to understand RDF [RDF11-CONCEPTS]. However, JSON-LD
>  was also designed to be usable as RDF, so people intending to use
>  JSON-LD with RDF tools will find it can be used like any other 
>  RDF syntax. Complete details of how JSON-LD relates to RDF are in
>  C. Relationship to RDF.
> 
> 
> So, no, this was not deliberate. It was simply a starting point (aka draft)
> provided by Sandro to bring the discussions back on track.
> 
> 
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
> 
> 
> 

------------------------------------------------------------
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 14:51:19 UTC

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