W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > July 2011

Re: JSON-LD Telecon Minutes for 2011-07-04

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 00:25:38 -0400
Message-ID: <4E2658C2.4050207@digitalbazaar.com>
To: "public-linked-json@w3.org" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On 07/19/2011 11:50 AM, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> I think we're getting caught up in the definition of "Linked Data"
> and the requirements for Linked Data in JSON. Certainly, to express
> Linked Data as JSON, unnamed nodes are not necessary. However, as
> language creators, we may need to take into consideration other
> reference points. Finding a way to accommodate existing JSON practice
> and make sense of it in the context of JSON-LD is also important
> IMO.

+1

I'm still uncertain whether Kingsley is talking about the definition of
"Linked Data" or the Requirements for Linked Data in JSON. I feel like I
have a more firm grasp of where Glenn and Ted are coming from, but I'm
still confused about whether we're talking about the definition for
Linked Data or the Requirements for JSON-LD.

> If the JSON-LD spec says "Items SHOULD be named with an IRI" this
> might imply that the processing steps do not need to consider the
> case when it's not, or that authors using unnamed items (or even
> items named with literals, for example) are somehow wrong. If an
> author conceivably COULD name all nodes with an IRI that means that
> they MUST.

I would be fine with the statement of "Nodes SHOULD be named with an IRI".

Our company is not going to follow that advice in practice. I would
expect that well over 90% of our data will contain unlabeled nodes. I
think many other Web developers are going to have unlabeled nodes as well.

> I'd be fine with a statement somewhere that extolls the virtue of
> pure Linked Data, but we need to take into consider the practical
> considerations for JSON-LD authors.

Agreed. I'm fine with telling people what "Real Linked Data(tm)" looks
like.

As long as we can express unlabeled nodes via the specification, we're
happy. If that means that we stop calling this JSON-LD and start calling
it JSON-SD, then so be it. I think the latter is going to be far more
useful to Web Developers.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarm Developer Tools and Demo Released
http://digitalbazaar.com/2011/05/05/payswarm-sandbox/
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 04:26:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:30 UTC