W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > July 2013

Re: API edits to avoid implying that JSON-LD is not RDF

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:58:50 -0400
Message-ID: <51F6832A.3060507@dbooth.org>
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
CC: 'Linked JSON' <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On 07/29/2013 10:29 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> On Monday, July 29, 2013 4:03 PM, David Booth wrote:
>> On 07/28/2013 11:01 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>> [ . . . ]
>>> There's slightly more than serialization / deserialization going on
>>> IMHO.  For example the JSON Number is coerced to XSD integer / double
>>> which are not 100%  the same things, depending on the implementation.
>>>
>>> I dont think these changes are terrible, but unless I've missed
>>> something, convert seems to be accurate here, and I'd lean towards
>>> keeping things the same.
>>
>> Yes, and I actually kept the word "convert" when discussing lower-level
>> things like data type conversions, for exactly the reason that you cite.
>>    The use of phrases like "serialize from RDF" and "deserialize to RDF"
>> is only at the higher level, in discussing the overall process.
>
> I haven't looked at the changes yet but I tend to agree with Melvin. These
> are not serialization algorithms, i.e., they are not producing an output in
> any of the concrete RDF syntaxes but emit abstract data structures
> representing RDF's data model, i.e., triples/quads. So, what if we would
> call those algorithms "Convert to/from RDF Quads Algorithm" instead?

No, the serialization is in the other direction: from abstract RDF to 
concrete JSON-LD.  Going from concrete JSON-LD to abstract RDF is 
deserialization.

>
> To be honest, I don't really see why we can't keep the current names given
> that the algorithms convert abstract RDF to a concrete JSON-LD serialization
> or vice versa.

In that sentence, you just described the overall process as 
serialization, and the lower-level techniques as conversion, and that is 
*exactly* the terminology strategy that I used, though it is possible 
that a drew the line in a slightly different place than you would.  Bear 
in mind that the purpose of the edits is to avoid implying that JSON-LD 
is not RDF.  Phrases like "convert JSON-LD to RDF" wrongly imply that 
JSON-LD is not RDF.  That's why I am trying to use the terms "serialize" 
and "deserialize" when talking about the overall process, while using 
terms like "convert" and "transform" when talking about specific actions 
in the algorithms.

Please read through the actual changes and see if you still have concerns.

David
Received on Monday, 29 July 2013 14:59:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:38 UTC