- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz <tomasz@t-code.pl>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:46:58 +0200
- To: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Cc: "public-hydra@w3.org" <public-hydra@w3.org>
On 2016-06-16 20:58, Ruben Verborgh wrote: >> I think that a Hydra client should be aware of RDF anyway. > > If you use JSON-LD as a content type, > which is a great idea for JavaScript anyways, > there are two ways to look at it: > – treat the JSON-LD as JSON (no triples) > – treat the JSON-LD as RDF (triples) > (In the first case, you might need JSON-LD framing.) Framing only work to a certain point in my experience. My biggest problem was with discovering SupportedProperty's operations. Finding subjects of triples is troublesome with JSON(-LD). With rdf library it's just a simple s/p/o call (not SPARQL though). > > So yes, even as an RDF fan myself, > I'd suggest that we should also look at the non-RDF route. > The most interesting libraries, however, > can actually offer both views: RDF (only) when you want it. Bottom line is, my Hydra library uses RDF for processing but each representation is currently only returned to the client as JSON objects.
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2016 19:47:39 UTC