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

Re: JSON-LD Syntax request for FPWD via RDF WG

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 15:42:53 +0100
Cc: "'Ivan Herman'" <ivan@w3.org>, "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, "'Linked JSON'" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0A6F2AF3-16F9-4B21-8B7D-1EAC1C3EEA75@cyganiak.de>
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Hi Markus,

On 22 May 2012, at 15:07, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> Thanks Ivan for answering this. The formal specification of the to/from RDF
> conversion is in the API spec: http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-api/
> which still needs a bit of work.

Ok, thanks, this is helpful.

Is there a particular reason why the RDF mapping is in the API spec rather than in the language spec?

Is the proposal that RDF-WG should take both the API spec and the language spec to REC?

At first glance, these sections look great. I notice three things though:

1. I'd prefer if the algorithms were defined in terms of standard RDF terminology (RDF graph, triple, IRI, etc.) rather than API interfaces that use quite different terminology (array of Statements, Statement, NamedNode, etc.)

See here for the RDF 1.1 data model:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html

2. Examples would be great.

3. Is it possible to serialize an RDF graph into a “pretty” JSON-LD document using a context? I presume the answer is “yes” and involves Compaction of the basic serialized output.

> Btw. I can't join the RDF WG mailing list. Is there anything I must know?

I believe that the list is members-only (with public archive). I don't know why. There is an open comments list here, which is generally better if non-WG-members are involved: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/

Best,
Richard


> 
> 
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 9:19 PM
>> To: Richard Cyganiak
>> Cc: Manu Sporny; RDF WG; Linked JSON
>> Subject: Re: JSON-LD Syntax request for FPWD via RDF WG
>> 
>> I am not Manu, but what I know is...
>> On May 22, 2012, at 14:17 , Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Manu,
>>> 
>>> A couple of questions:
>>> 
>>> * Is JSON-LD an RDF serialization?
>> 
>> I think the best way of saying it is: it can be used as an RDF
>> serialization, although applications may use it directly, too, without
>> referring to RDF.
>> 
>>> * Given a JSON-LD document, how do I get an RDF graph from it?
>> 
>> The answer is that this is a bit hidden in the document though, when
>> reading it, the conversion is fairly clear. But I agree is it not
>> explicit. Manu, it may be worth having a separate section that makes
>> that mapping absolutely explicit and formal.
>> 
>>> * Given an RDF graph, how do I turn it into a JSON-LD document?
>> 
>> I think that if we get the previous issue done, that answers this
>> question, too.
>> 
>>> * Can any RDF graph be serialized as a JSON-LD document?
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes.
>> 
>> B.t.w., just for the fun of it: the RDFa 1.1 distiller
>> http://www.w3.org/2012/pyRdfa/ already has a JSON-LD serialization
>> option (alongside RDF/XML and turtle).
>> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Richard
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 22 May 2012, at 05:19, Manu Sporny wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Last week, the Linked Data in JSON Community Group discussed whether
>> or
>>>> not we thought that JSON-LD was ready to be moved into the RDF WG
>> for
>>>> REC-track standardization:
>>>> 
>>>> http://json-ld.org/minutes/2012-05-15/#topic-1
>>>> 
>>>> There was consensus that the JSON-LD Syntax is finalized (as far as
>> the
>>>> CG is concerned). There may be one more change that we are
>> considering,
>>>> but that change would depend on feedback we get from this group.
>> There
>>>> will, of course, be plenty of opportunity to discuss changes to the
>> spec
>>>> in the RDF WG.
>>>> 
>>>> There is a date-stamped document that is available for review here:
>>>> 
>>>> http://json-ld.org/spec/ED/json-ld-syntax/20120522/
>>>> 
>>>> So, this is a request to place the JSON-LD Syntax specification on
>> the
>>>> W3C Recommendation track via the RDF Working Group. David, Guus -
>> what
>>>> are the next steps?
>>>> 
>>>> -- manu
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
>>>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>>> blog: PaySwarm Website for Developers Launched
>>>> http://digitalbazaar.com/2012/02/22/new-payswarm-alpha/
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----
>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>> mobile: +31-641044153
>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 14:44:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:49 GMT