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

partial comments on JSON-LD document

From: Peter Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:32:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMpDgVwjhwAtSBAU3oz+_Z51iH7L8ZernVNaEXHZSCzWs5LV7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
I found the following uses of arrays in JSON-LD

A.0 node definitions
A.1 @context value
    @type value
    @graph value
    property value
A.3 @language value
A.5 @list value
    @set value
    @set value part
A.6 expended term def

It is especially important that all of these have tests indicating their
ordered status.   There needs to be discussion of their ordered status in
the text of the document.


It seems to me that there are quite a few problems with JSON-LD
- no definition for @set or @list definitions
- no discussion on multiple node definitions with the same id
- no idea of what an array of sets or lists is
- no link from array property values to 4.9
- no idea of how to handle @set or @list values
- null values


Some things that I noticed:

JSON-LD allows nested named (and unnamed) graphs!

"unlabeled node" should be "blank node label"

@graph is not needed "to express a set of JSON-LD node definitions that may
not be directly related to one another".  This wording should be changed.

Is there any prohibition on multiple node definitions with the same @id?
There should not be.  But then, there is no need to call out node
references.

Why have both
"foo" : [ 1, 2, 3 ]
and
"foo" : { "@set" : [ 1, 2, 3] }
Received on Saturday, 20 October 2012 21:32:34 GMT

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