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: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:10:35 -0400
Message-ID: <51B8D5BB.1090200@openlinksw.com>
To: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
On 6/12/13 3:04 PM, David Booth wrote:
>
>
> On 06/12/2013 02:09 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 6/12/13 2:04 PM, David Booth wrote:
>>> On 06/12/2013 01:27 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>> [ . . . ]
>>>> A little tweak, for consideration.
>>>>
>>>> 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 RDF compatible, so people intending to use
>>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> "compatible with RDF" wrongly suggests that JSON-LD is *not* RDF.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> "..However, JSON-LD was also designed to be usable as RDF.."
>>
>> What does that mean?
>>
>> How is something usable as RDF?
>>
>> Let's try this then:
>>
>>    JSON-LD was designed to be usable by developers as idiomatic JSON,
>>    with no need to understand RDF [RDF11-CONCEPTS]. However, 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.
>>
>> Change:
>>
>> I removed "JSON-LD was also designed to be usable as RDF, so"
>
> -1
>
> That makes it unclear that JSON-LD is RDF.
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
David,

Your position is understood re., the minuses. Thus, I would kindly ask 
you to let others digest what I've outlined below so that they can 
figure out how to fix the concerns outlined. The rest of this mail 
simply puts things together so that others don't have to crawl through a 
growing thread.


Original:

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.

Concern:

What does "usable as RDF" mean? Bearing in mind that RDF is a framework 
i.e., the Resource Description Framework.

I suspect it could mean that JSON-LD can be used as a Resource 
Description Framework?

My suggested alternative wording, assuming the goal isn't to state that 
JSON-LD can be used as a Resource Description Framework:

JSON-LD was designed to be usable by developers as idiomatic JSON,
with no need to understand RDF [RDF11-CONCEPTS]. However, 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.




-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 20:10:58 UTC

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