Re: LDP interfaces in Java (based on Jena and JAX-RS)

It can be made to work but there are technical consequences: the 
submission design uses the fact its RDF because it adds triples and 
understands some as well.  The entity and the record about the entity 
are in the same unit (this has pros and cons in itself).

If the entity and the record about the entity were separate, then the 
entity itself can be opaque to the system and any format.

If the entity and record about the entity remain the same, there are 
some constraints on the entity form :

1/ The system must be able to under stand it (at the schema level).
2/ It has to allow additional information without impacting the 
impacting the original meaning.

	Andy


On 06/08/12 10:33, Erik.Wilde@emc.com wrote:
> hello ashok.
>
> On 2012-08-06 11:08 , "Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote:
>> In addition to Reza's questions i would like to ask whether the WG will
>> consider
>> linked data in XML and JSON in addition to linked data in RDF.
>
> while i cannot speak for the group authoritatively, i had the same
> question when we started working, assuming that REST could mean negotiable
> representations and maybe giving recommendations on how to expose linked
> data for a greater variety of consumers. however, it seems that the
> majority of the group considers "linked data" to be based on RDF by
> definition, and my take-away from the initial discussions was that there
> is little interest to work on how to make linked data available to non-RDF
> clients.
>
> when it comes to simply representing RDF in XML or JSON, there's of course
> always RDF/XML and JSON-LD, which are serializations of RDF in the
> respective formats, but i assume you were asking about scenarios where the
> data model is not based on RDF.
>
> cheers,
>
> dret.
>
>

Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 13:02:10 UTC