RE: Syntax doc edits to avoid implying that JSON-LD is not RDF

On Monday, July 29, 2013 12:16 AM, David Booth wrote:
> Attached are the corresponding changes that I see that are needed in
> the syntax document:
> Again, three documents are attached:
>   - json-ld-index.html.old: A snapshot of the Syntax document as it was
> before I made the attached edits, to provide a basis for diffs.
>   - json-ld-index2.html: The Syntax document containing my suggested
> changes.
>   - json-ld-index2-diffs.txt: Diffs between the above files.

Just as with your changes for the API spec, I've created a pull request for this and commented the changes there. See:

> Other editorial issues that I noticed but I did not fix in the attached
> version:
> 1. The Abstract begins: "JSON is a useful data serialization and
> messaging format".  Delete "useful" or perhaps delete the whole
> sentence.  (Other data serialization and messaging formats are *not*
> useful?)

The abstract is a teaser trying to convince people to read the rest. As such, I think it is fine to include such a statement. Just because something is useful doesn't automatically mean other things aren't.

> 2. The Features at Risk section needs to be updated regarding blank
> nodes as predicates.

Are you still talking about the syntax spec? Why does it need to be changed? Because it doesn't list those three options? That's just an issue marker and will be dropped in the final document.

David, could you please join the JSON-LD Community Group ( so that we can use your contributions. I will check if we need anything else from you before I can merge those changes.


Markus Lanthaler

Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 16:30:42 UTC