- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:12:32 +0100
- To: William Waites <ww@styx.org>
- CC: Brian Peterson <publicayers@verizon.net>, 'Dave Longley' <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>, public-linked-json@w3.org
William Waites wrote:
> What's "complex" about RDF is not the different serialisations but the
> data model (where "complex" should really be understood as
> "different"). My recent experience working with the developers of
> BibJSON (basically BibTeX in JSON) and trying to align it with JSON-LD
> suggests that apart from trivial superficial things ("@" and "Â#" are"
> funny character") the main contention is in the modelling -- the
> indirections that are used in RDF to make things unambiguous. So it
> looks like flatter dictionaries are preferred over nesting even if it
> makes it ambiguous what subject a key/predicate belongs to. This is
> really independent of the complexity of the specs or ease of use of
> any serialisation...
Yup, you hit the nail on the head there.
Should really be priority one eh.. you need a good, strong, familiar and
*simple* foundation to build on - we've certainly got a good strong one..
Received on Friday, 17 June 2011 21:13:35 UTC