W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2012

Re: JSON-LD terminology

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:14:17 -0400
Message-ID: <503E23B9.1090506@openlinksw.com>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 8/29/12 10:05 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> The proposal for a reworded Linked Data definition is better.
>
>> Some of the data model differences require further discussion and
>> need to be publicly aired, as they impinge on long-held resolutions
>> in JSON-LD.
>
> Good to hear -
>
>
> One specific point:
>
>> [[ 1. Linked Data is a set of documents, each containing a
>> representation
> of a linked data graph.
> ...
>> 8. IRIs used within a linked data graph SHOULD be dereferenceable to
>> a Linked Data document describing the resource denoted by that IRI.
>> ]]]
>
>
> Test case: is foaf:name <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> an IRI
> dereferenceable to a Linked Data document?

See:

1. 
http://kingsley.idehen.net/describe/?url=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name 
-- It does resolve to content that describes the subject denoted by the IRI

2. http://bit.ly/SQOQvx -- same thing via vapor.

[SNIP]

>
>     Andy
>
>
>


-- 

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, 29 August 2012 14:14:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:06 UTC