- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 11:41:27 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 03/07/13 22:38, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Jul 3, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: > >> On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 7:23 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>> A graph in JSON-LD should be a generalized RDF graph. >> >> But it is not. JSON-LD has built-in lists (because JSON has arrays) - mapping them to rdf:List is trivial but nevertheless they are part of the data model in JSON-LD. The situation is similar for numbers and booleans. > > I don't consider JSON-LD lists as being conceptually any different that Turtle Lists; these are artifacts of the serialization, and not the underlying data model. Are all JSON-LD lists transformed to RDF lists by the json-ld-api/#list-to-rdf-conversion? It's not clear -- it says "a list may be represented using the @list keyword as follows:" -- not a RFC-MAY but only a "may" nevertheless). Suggestion: clarify as to whether there are other ways or not. E.g. "a list is represented using the @list keyword as follows:") The problem is about syntax and which data model is which. This confusion is manifest by the fact that the documents are split Serialization / Algorithms where the document entitles "serialization" includes an appendix on "Data Model". A separate document on "Data Model" would have been good. Making that it not-an-appendix, but still at the end of the document, might help. We have 1/ syntax : JSON, with additional rulesas given by the JSON-LD grammar. 2/ JSON-LD data model - specific to JSON-LD and only JSON-LD 3/ RDF abstract data model. JSON and JSON-LD independent. Output of json-ld-api/#rdf-conversion-algorithms. Andy > > Gregg > >> We can't ignore the JSON in JSON-LD. >> >> >> -- >> Markus Lanthaler >> @markuslanthaler >> >> > >
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2013 10:41:58 UTC