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

Re: Branding?

From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:51:34 -0400
Message-ID: <4E30B296.2090600@digitalbazaar.com>
To: public-linked-json@w3.org
On 07/27/2011 08:47 PM, Nathan wrote:
> Dave Longley wrote:
>> On 07/27/2011 01:48 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> How about:
>>>
>>> 1. JSON-*D   -- in some form courtesy of Alex's post re. blank nodes 
>>> accomodation
>>>
>>> 2. JSONG  -- JSON Graphs (it does have rhythm to it)
>>>
>>> 3. JSON-XD -- "X" is whatever you want to make of it without 
>>> breaking anything via conflation .
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I have thought about something that indicates "Graphs in JSON" 
>> before, so if we must rename the spec then something along the lines 
>> of JSONG would be alright with me. The only problem, in particular 
>> with JSONG, is that it is difficult to differentiate it from JSON 
>> when pronounced, if pronounced "JAY-SONG".
>>
>
> We do need to remember that it's only a particular kind of graph 
> though, a labelled di-graph. Mentioning because there will be lots of 
> other people passing over generic graphs in JSON for use with charts 
> and diagrams, who may easily get confused if we go down the "graphs in 
> JSON" route.
>
> Interestingly, Labelled Directed Graph also reduces to LD / LDG.

That might be a good compromise. JSON, Labeled and Directed: JSON-LD. 
And it's easy to remember that if you want to express Linked Data in 
JSON, you use JSON-LD -- even if that isn't strictly the origin of its name.

-- 
Dave Longley
CTO
Digital Bazaar, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 00:51:57 UTC

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