- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:50:52 +0800
- To: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
> I think applying "out-of-band" annotations to "current" > JSON is not what I mean by a graph representation. Each > node has to have an ID. Otherwise you've got a tree. "Out-of-band annotation" as you call it doesn't prevent every node to have an ID in any way. It's just a separation of concerns. Or did I miss something? It is just so that the description of how the representation has to be interpreted is stored in a different document. It's basically the machine-readable counterpart of descriptions as the following ones: - https://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/api/album/ - https://developer.foursquare.com/docs/responses/user.html - http://dev.twitter.com/doc/get/users/show Since all of these APIs are RESTful every representation has an unique URI, by using a fragment identifier you could also link directly to subparts of such a JSON representation.
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 10:51:24 UTC