W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-json-ld-wg@w3.org > July 2018

Re: JSON-LD 1.1 Design Principles - brainstorm

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2018 09:47:05 -0400
To: public-json-ld-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <15550945-f932-52c9-c0f4-946db8cf35a2@digitalbazaar.com>
On 07/03/2018 06:08 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
> How did the 1.0 WG make scoping decisions, and was that process seen 
> as effective and fair?

The primary driver for scoping decisions in JSON-LD 1.0 was effectively:

* Is adding this feature going to enable a larger number of developers
  to benefit from Linked Data without having to learn anything about it?

I think people forget how dismissive or hostile some long-term RDF folks
were to the JSON-LD work at first... it was just one of the options on
the table for JSON serialization in the RDF 1.1 WG. So, it was a bit of
a scuffle in the early days followed by the RDF community wanting to
make it more RDF-y than some of us would have liked. There were
compromises made and in the end; we all created something that became
useful over time.

For those of you that want more background, here it is:

http://manu.sporny.org/2014/json-ld-origins/
http://manu.sporny.org/2014/json-ld-origins-2/

If there are any process lessons to be learned, those articles may
provide some insights.

> Thoughts? Further ideas for principles to discuss?

Overall, good principles (save for one, more on that below).

> * The underlying data model is RDF.
> 
> If a feature comes up that can't be modeled with RDF as the 
> underlying abstract data model, then we refer the feature to a future
> RDF WG for potential inclusion at that time. Similarly, we should
> ensure that the features of RDF are expressed in JSON-LD, to ensure
> that data can be round-tripped with confidence through different
> serializations.

-1 ... JSON-LD as we know it now would have never happened if we had
waited for the RDF community to catch up. There is a more generic data
model in JSON-LD, and we have the flexibility to add to it if we want to
as long as we're not breaking backwards compatibility with JSON-LD 1.0

I'm not saying that we should do this without thinking deeply about the
feature. I'm merely stating that we don't want to box ourselves into a
corner that will prevent us from thinking creatively about solutions.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
Received on Friday, 6 July 2018 13:47:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:15:23 UTC