- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 22:45:54 +0100
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- Cc: public-html-data-tf <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
Thanks Gregg, On 4 Oct 2011, at 00:14, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Oct 3, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Jeni Tennison wrote: >> Undoubtedly it will be useful to have JSON versions of the RDF extracted from the RDFa/microdata/microformats embedded within an HTML page. Assuming that we manage to get a good mapping from microdata to RDF (Gregg, I'm really hoping you'll take a lead on that), > > I can start be resurecting the Microdata-RDF bits and put them on the wiki. We can then add modifications we feel are necessary, such as the @itemprop token to URI generation. It could also be used to discuss other proposed changes, such as @itemdatatype. It would be really great if you could do that. There's a placeholder page at [1] that you could use. Do start threads on any questions that you feel are controversial. I think there are a few people within this group who are interested in working on / implementing the mapping -- in particular Lin and Benjii spring to mind -- so I'd hope we could progress quickly on it. > If we go Microdata->RDF->JSON-LD, there is a loss issue, depending on rules we decide for generating RDF from multi-valued properties. RDFa->RDF->JSON-LD wouldn't be so much of a problem. > > Alternatively, we can consider suggesting changes to the Microdata JSON format so that Microdata->JSON->RDF has full fidelity. OK. Presumably the changes will become apparent as you flesh out the mapping rules? > Describing Microdata->JSON-LD in terms of the existing processing rules would be pretty straightforward too. I don't have any objection to that being done, it's only that we have a lot else to do too which I want to make sure we cover. Cheers, Jeni [1]: http://www.w3.org/wiki/Mapping_Microdata_to_RDF -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Thursday, 6 October 2011 21:46:31 UTC