W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > January 2013

PROV-ISSUE-619 (json-ld-service-description): Should PRIV-AQ bless use of JSON-LD for service description? [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:23:15 +0000
Message-Id: <E1U0xr1-0001lV-0t@tibor.w3.org>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
PROV-ISSUE-619 (json-ld-service-description): Should PRIV-AQ bless use of JSON-LD for service description? [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/619

Raised by: Graham Klyne
On product: Accessing and Querying Provenance

In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2013Jan/0121.html, around issues 42) and/or 43), Stian has proposed specifying use of JSON-LD as a format for service descriptions.  I'll paste the specific proposal as a separate comment to this issue.

I note that such use of JSON-LD is not disallowed by the current specification, just not explained.  The general recommendation is that service descriptions are presented as RDF, though other formats are negotiable in keeping with REST principles.  JSON-LD would be a specific [presentation of RDF.

The question is: should we consider making specific mention of  JSON-LD for service descriptions?  Considerations would include:
- does it make the specification more complex?
- does it make the specification more presriptive?  Is this desirable?
- is JSON-LD sufficiently well-used to be considered a blessed format fort RDF data?
- should we wait to see what consensus the W3C LDP group may form around the general topic of linked data service descriptions?
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 17:23:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:28 UTC