- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:46:13 +0100
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On 31 Jan 2012, at 19:08, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: >> I am sorry, but I do not think that is really good. My use case is the >> serialization of an RDFa content; that content very often contains >> several graphs (e.g., there might be statements on some content the >> author defines, and then some other statements on the enclosing HTML >> file). The context for all these graphs are identical or, to be more >> exact, an RDFa processor has no way to find out (or it is very >> complicated) which context should be used for which graph. As a result, >> possibly complex contexts (with all the namespace definitions from the >> RDFa source) will be repeated. I think that is ugly. > > What is the intended end use of this RDFa to JSON-LD conversion? You could, > e.g., directly create an expanded document without any contexts in it. > > It is a json serialization of RDFa. Actually, forget about RDFa. The same issue happens when you want to serialize any RDF graph. There isn't, necessarily, a "root" that one could use. If we take it seriously that json ld is (also) a serialization format for RDF, alongside, say, Turtle, then this issue arises. Ivan > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > > >
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2012 18:43:54 UTC