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

Re: Potential Formal Object from DERI over JSON-LD

From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:57:18 +0100
Message-Id: <1EDDAC25-89FD-4521-9522-86A845131898@deri.org>
To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>

Thank you, Manu - you beat me to it ;)

Just to clarify: this is not about the quality or the amount of work that went into JSON-LD. Neither do I want to discuss its usefulness. I acknowledge that there are use cases where JSON-LD certainly serves well.

## Why, oh why?

We're faced with a situation ATM that the JSON-LD proponents talk with two different groups: on the one hand us here in the WG and on the other hand to potential adopters such as Drupal or WikiData. Towards the former group the  JSON-LD proponents keep maintaining that JSON-LD is in fact an RDF serialization. Towards the latter stake holders, the  JSON-LD proponents claim that JSON-LD has nothing to do with RDF.

You can't have the cake and eat it.


## Options

Now, to break it down, I see two options:

1. JSON-LD is indeed considered as an official RDF serialization by the  JSON-LD proponents. Then, JSON-LD has to follow the RDF model 100% - no more exceptions, no new terms, etc.
2. JSON-LD is not considered as an official RDF serialization by the  JSON-LD proponents, in which case I propose to stop continuing on the REC track in the RDF WG, effective immediately.

Again, it is unfortunate that this surfaces so late in the process but I was observing the JSON-LD development (in RDF WG land and outside) for a while now and was sort of - admittedly naïvely - hoping it would sort out by itself.


Cheers,
	   Michael

--
Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel.: +353 91 495730
http://mhausenblas.info/

On 17 Oct 2012, at 20:18, Manu Sporny wrote:

> Michael Hausenblas wrote:
>> (with my DERI AC rep and RDF WG member hat on) I will strongly
>> advise the [RDF] WG to abandon REC track for JSON-LD.
> 
> The rest of the conversation is here:
> 
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/102497386507936526460/posts/KCVJVLNZKNb?cfem=1
> 
> Bringing it to the groups attention so we're not blind-sided by it
> during FTF3, LC or CR.
> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: HTML5 and RDFa 1.1
> http://manu.sporny.org/2012/html5-and-rdfa/
> 
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 08:57:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:52 GMT