Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data)

Zitat von Gregg Reynolds <dev@mobileink.com>:

> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
>
>>  On 06/10/2013 10:29 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:
>>
>> JSON-LD was designed to be compatible with Semantic Web technologies like
>> RDF and SPARQL.
>>
>> +1
>
>> People intending to use JSON-LD with RDF tools
>>
>> Not sure how that would work.  Suggestion:  people intending to use
> JSON-LD to express RDF data...
>  (or "rdf graphs" or whatever).

Well, if JSON-LD is a concrete syntax of RDF then people indeed will  
wish to work with it on the abstract RDF level. They need tools than  
can parse the JSON-LD and "transform it into a usable programmable  
API" just using the abstract interface.

As I mentioned earlier, the big advantage of RDF is the separation of  
abstract and concrete syntax. Nobody actually wants to take care of  
the concrete syntax. There is a graph and I can query it and change at  
will via an abstract interface like SPARQL or rdflib interface.


  My project currently uses an XML -> turtle
> pipeline, where the XML is effectively used to express (represent, if you
> like) "rdf data", just because it's easier to inspect and edit.  I look
> forward to using JSON-LD to express the same thing in a directly
> RDF-compatible language (or "RDF dialect"? "member of the RDF syntax
> family"?).
>
> -Gregg Reynolds


-- 
Sven R. Kunze
Chemnitz University of Technology
Department of Computer Science
Distributed and Self-organizing Systems Group
Straße der Nationen 62
D-09107 Chemnitz
Germany
E-Mail: sven.kunze@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de
WWW: http://vsr.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de/people/kunze
Phone: +49 371 531 33882

Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 09:55:08 UTC