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

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

From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 18:17:08 -0400
Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0677EFE1-26E8-435D-A815-660830CE8D51@3roundstones.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Hi all,

On May 22, 2012, at 09:18, Ivan Herman wrote:

> 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.

It seems to me that any such format (e.g. Turtle) could be used as "just a format", but we know that the RDF serializations represent data in accordance with the RDF data model.  I would therefore prefer to see JSON-LD described as an RDF serialization.

Is there any reason not to do so?

Regards,
Dave


> 
>> * 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 22:17:58 GMT

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