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: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:11:38 -0400
Message-ID: <4E30E17A.8080802@digitalbazaar.com>
To: public-linked-json@w3.org
On 07/26/2011 10:49 AM, Dean Landolt wrote:
>     I understand
>     the idea of standardizing a way to represent directed, labeled
>     graphs in JSON. I do not understand the point of this "JSON-SD"
>     thing at all.
>
> I was under the impression that the difference between JSON-SD and
> JSON-LD is that JSON-SD + out-of-band schema could very well create
> JSON-LD. I may be misinterpreting the intent of JSON-SD though :)

Well, this JSON-SD/JSON-LD split is clearly confusing people. It is a 
sign that we're on the wrong path.

Here was the intent:

1. Both JSON-SD/CD/LSD and JSON-LD allows one to have both in-band and
    out-of-band @context.
2. Both solutions allow you to express Linked Data.
3. If you use an unlabeled node, you have a JSON-SD document.
4. If you use IRI identifiers for all of your nodes, you have a JSON-LD
    document.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Uber Comparison of RDFa, Microformats and Microdata
http://manu.sporny.org/2011/uber-comparison-rdfa-md-uf/
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 04:12:01 UTC

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