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

Official response to ISSUE-162: Attempt to converge markup mechanisms for OData and JSON-LD

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 03:57:58 -0400
Message-ID: <52663006.5010409@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Michael Pizzo <mikep@microsoft.com>
CC: RDF WG Comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Hi Michael,

Thank you for your feedback on the JSON-LD specifications. This is an
official response to RDF-ISSUE-162: Attempt to converge markup
mechanisms for OData and JSON-LD, which is being tracked here:

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/162

You mentioned that you would like to see the meta-markup mechanisms
between OData and JSON-LD converge to a similar syntax. Specifically,
you had wanted to find alignment between both the OData and JSON-LD
groups in how we specify language-specific keywords. As a result of your
comment, we had an extensive discussion about the topic here:

http://json-ld.org/minutes/2013-10-01/#topic-3

Based on that discussion, we didn't feel that the JSON-LD specification
needed to change to achieve the sort of alignment you wanted. However,
unsure if we had understood your request correctly, we asked that you
join the JSON-LD call to clarify your position. You kindly agreed to
join and discuss the issue at length with us, which is captured here:

http://json-ld.org/minutes/2013-10-08/#topic-1

In the end, the group decided that much of what is necessary for
eventual alignment is already there and that any more aggressive
alignment at this point in time would:

1. Destabilize existing implementations and deployments, like Google's
    use of JSON-LD in Gmail.
2. Be unnecessary, considering that many of the changes that you
    requested could be accomplished via JSON-LD term aliasing.
3. Place the JSON-LD Candidate Recommendation at risk and require
    another Last Call based on the changes you were proposing.

You agreed with the reasoning on the call and we setup a plan to work
together on future versions of JSON-LD and OData since the desire to
work together was clear from the discussions on the telecon.

Due to these reasons, and because we can apply much of what you want via
a JSON-LD Context or in a future version of the specification, we
decided to not align OData and JSON-LD more than we had agreed to on the
call with you. This resulted in no changes to the specification while
also attempting to work on alignment in a way that didn't threaten the
stability of the specification.

We believe this strikes the right balance between the choices that were
in front of the groups. Please respond as soon as possible to this email
to tell us whether or not you are satisfied with the decision of the group.

-- 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/
Received on Tuesday, 22 October 2013 08:56:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 22 October 2013 08:56:44 UTC