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

Re: Minimum useful linked data

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 21:00:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CAM=Pv=SU-zB+53RQf7Fv6rXYkuiFi4t0YWwk_GJwWVsFt64xdg@mail.gmail.com>
To: linked-data-api-discuss@googlegroups.com
Cc: public-linked-json@w3.org
On 3 September 2011 20:14, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:

> Danny,
>
> I assume you've looked through the archives of this mailing list? The issue
> of Linked Data has been long thrashed out with regards to JSON-LD. This
> effort culminated in a requirements document [1] .
>
> Links:
>
> 1. http://json-ld.org/requirements/latest/ -- note sections on Linked Data .

Right, my bad, I had overlooked:

   9. An IRI that is a label in a linked data graph should be
dereferencable to a Linked Data document describing the labeled
subject, object or property.

But that's still only in the requirements - where is it fulfilled? The
examples in the spec don't yet take this into account.

It would be pretty easy to deal with, e.g. by inserting a little text
before the existing example in 2.3 along the lines of:

[[
Manu is identified by the URI http://manu.sporny.org/people#me.
Dereferencing that URI with a HTTP GET can produce a representation
like ...
]]

(btw, I haven't looked through the archives much, but I was in on a
telecon when part of the thrashing out of that definition took place
:)

Cheers,
Danny.


-- 
http://dannyayers.com
Received on Saturday, 3 September 2011 19:01:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:32 UTC