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

Re: JSON-LD for USG

From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 18:00:29 -0400
Cc: JSON-LD JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1DB1A695-CCC0-4067-9B20-13103FBC3CC4@3roundstones.com>
To: Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com>

On May 18, 2013, at 11:32, Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 10:23 AM, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com> wrote:
> 
> It also wouldn't hurt to comment in this thread:
>   https://github.com/project-open-data/project-open-data.github.io/pull/21
> 
> Interesting thread of comments.  The crux of the "anti" argument seems to be that they don't want to mandate things which aren't already widely adopted and they don't see LD or JSON-LD as being widely adopted in comparison to more mainstream things like CSV & XML.  
> 
> Would you say that their impression is mistaken and that JSON-LD adoption is on par with that of CSV or XML? What would you say the rough percentages are?


Technologies change rapidly.  If you don't accept that, we might want to go back to EBCDIC and GML.  EDI is widely deployed, as are fax machines and FTP.  Should we suggest their use instead of JSON-LD?

Regards,
Dave
--
http://about.me/david_wood


> 
> Tom


Received on Saturday, 18 May 2013 22:00:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:37 UTC