On 02/15/2015 03:14 PM, Dan Brickley wrote: ... > As you say there are plenty of details to work through. One thing to > consider is the extend to which we might want to make use of the > @context facilities of JSON-LD, to map between JSON structures and > namespaced URIs. Whatever we do needs to work also for Microdata and > RDFa ... Could we consider looking at your last statement more in direction: "Whatever we do needs to work with HTML (Microdata or RDFa) So we don't require JSON-LD, make sure that people can use good old HTML and then depending on complexity of data they want to publish, can choose between Microdata or RDFa. I also find RDFa Vocabulary Expansion quite interesting and lightweight * http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_vocab_expansion TL;DR * rdf:type * rdfs:subClassOf * rdfs:subPropertyOf * owl:equivalentClass * owl:equivalentProperty It looks similar to schema.org at least because it does not use rdfs:domain & rdfs:range On the other hand, Embedding JSON-LD in HTML Documents could also come as solution here * http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#embedding-json-ld-in-html-documents Cheers!
Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2015 08:55:23 UTC