- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:02:55 -0400
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- CC: "public-linked-json@w3.org" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Jul 13, 2011, at 4:50 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 7/14/11 12:31 AM, Gregg Kellogg wrote: >> I updated the requirements document as discussed [1]. As the question of @subject having an IRI label being MAY or SHOULD, I left it as MAY for the time being, with an issue noting some reasons why it is still MAY. We can always re-address this in the future. >> >> I made some editorial changes to section 3.2 (JSON-LD), but this hasn't received any significant discussion. If we can move on from 3.1 for the time being, let's see which of these we can form consensus over, which remain contentious (perhaps annotating the issue) and requirements that might be missing. >> >> Thanks for everyone's participation in trying to bring some closure to the requirements, and especially to Brad's word-smithing. >> >> Gregg >> >> [1] http://json-ld.org/requirements/latest/ >> >> >> > Gregg, > > Note: > 3.2 JSON-LD > > The following are taken to be requirements for expressing JSON as Linked > Data. > > It should read: > The following are taken to be requirements for creating Linked Data > using JSON. > > or > > The following are taken to be requirements for JSON based Linked Data. Of course! Thanks for catching that. > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > President& CEO > OpenLink Software > Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 14 July 2011 01:03:47 UTC