- From: Alexandre Passant <alex@seevl.net>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:55:10 +0000
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Markus Lanthaler
<markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:
>> >> I'd also favor a "@suffix" element, so that I could use
>> >>
>> >> {
>> >> "@base": "http://example.org"
>> >> "@suffix": "#id"
>> >> "friend": {
>> >> "id": "foobar",
>> >> }
>> >> }
>> >
>> > I can't see what kind of functionality a @suffix element would
>> allow.. Could
>> > you elaborate?
>> >
>>
>> That would let JSON authors remove #whatever fro JSON-LD values - and
>> have those automatically added when transforming JSON-LD to RDF
>
> That would add it to every IRI.
Indeed - I haven't realised this
Honestly, I don't see much value in it. Also
> it makes understanding to which IRI "foobar" is eventually expanded quite
> difficult as you would have to remember even more things. That being said we
> assume that the vast majority of JSON-LD documents will be generated by
> machines and not written manually by humans. So it is much more important to
> make them easy to read then to write. Being more explicit and reducing the
> number of things to keep in mind surely helps in that regards.
But JSON docs (and related specs) are also read by developers -
removing URIs, #fragments would ease the process of adoption
>
>
>> > Same here.. what kind of functionality does this enable? I can see
>> some use
>> > cases where URI templates are needed but that can be described
>> without
>> > having explicit support by JSON-LD as well IMO.
>>
>> Same as before - is there already some templating support in native
>> JSON ?
>
> No.. But you could define a concept whose value is a template. Or even a
> datatype for templated IRIs.
A template for @subject would be good.
So far, I have to use @subject + id (dc:identifier) if I want to use a
shorter URI representation in the doc
Alex.
>
>
>> Overall my goal is to make the JSON serialisation as simple as
>> possible - while keeping the RDF-ization of JSON-LD documents as
>> complete as the spec allows.
>
> So is mine. In the last telecon we made great progress in greatly
> simplifying JSON-LD while still keeping all of the functionality. As far as
> I know, we currently support everything that's supported in RDF.
>
>
>
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
>
>
>
>
--
Dr. Alexandre Passant - @terraces
Founder, CEO - http://seevl.net - @seevl
http://facebook.com/seevl.net - http://angel.co/seevl
Received on Friday, 16 December 2011 08:55:39 UTC