- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:19:02 -0400
- To: public-linked-json@w3.org
-cc: public-lod@w3.org Sorry, I don't think we should be cross-posting this discussion. Feel free to add it back in, but until we have an idea of what we're doing, I don't think it's helpful to pull the larger community in. Especially since they don't know what we're trying to do with JSON-*D. On 07/28/2011 01:21 PM, Danny Ayers wrote: > "LD" meaning "Labeled and Directed" for JSON-LD works for me too. I have an issue with "Labeled and Directed" - try using it in a conversation with a Web Developer that doesn't know about this area - Linked Data, Semantic Web, etc. It will take quite a bit to explain to them what "Labeled and Directed" means. Kingsley, Dave, Danny - what about: "JSON for Linking Data" - JSON-LD That way, the name itself is fairly self-explanatory and we don't muddy the waters by using the "Linked Data" terminology in the spec's name. We can have a definition of "Linked Data" in the spec, and tell them that is the ideal we want to move towards, but that the "JSON for Linking Data" allows them to express Linked Data as well as other types of non-Linked data. Thoughts? -- 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 18:19:27 UTC