- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 23:56:47 -0700
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
I have been staying out of the heated discussion on JSON-LD partly because it is happening on public-rdf-comments. This does not mean that I am not interested in the discussion. It also does not mean that I am happy with the current state of the JSON-LD documents. It also does not mean that I am happy with the direction that the JSON-LD documents are heading in. I am pretty sure that my thoughts on this matter are on record in the WG archives. (On JSON-LD - if JSON-LD is to be a product of the RDF WG then it must have a very close relationship to RDF, both in actuality and, perhaps more importantly, in description. On documents - defining documents are to be written to be precise and to build on previous work, and not to be quick or easy reads nor stand-alone nor to hide relationships.) peter
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 06:57:16 UTC