- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 18:10:31 +0200
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
[21:12] <dlongley> the same graph can be represented in many different ways in JSON-LD Yup, which is confusing and makes it much harder to code against. [21:12] <manu> Not dealing with normalization is a mistake that RDF serializations have been making for years... Right, RDF/XML has so many different possible serializations that it's impractical to use standard XML processing tools (XPath, XSLT, XQuery etc) on it. Which kind of defeats the object of having it in XML in the first place. If JSON-LD isn't recognisable as idiomatic JSON, it'll fail for the same reason. There have been a few 'normalized RDF/XML' proposal, and a few people have used them locally - but they've never really caught on, probably because they do demand a normalization step. JSON-LD normalization shouldn't really be needed (it suggests there's too much complexity), and definitely not by regular JSON users. [21:29] <manu> I mean, we've considered dropping CURIEs many times at Digital Bazaar... and every time we come to the same conclusion: "The number of terms that we're going to be using in these digital contracts is going to explode when 3rd parties start extending the digital contracts to suit their needs." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_ain't_gonna_need_it ? -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2011 16:10:58 UTC