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

Re: Defining "LD" (was Re: Branding?)

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 21:28:47 +0200
Message-ID: <CAM=Pv=RzKeKMBPRvfirm12wFK2X92rkzb=XAL71WOK-h=YKGYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: public-linked-json@w3.org
On 28 July 2011 20:45, Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 02:19 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:

>> 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.

Ah, right, I can imagine. I guess that should be dropped.

>> 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
> I would be fine with "JSON for Linking Data".

Me too.

Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 19:29:15 UTC

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