W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > June 2013

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

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 09:16:25 -0400
Message-ID: <51B874A9.4070604@dbooth.org>
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
CC: 'public-rdf-comments' <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
On 06/12/2013 04:16 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:09 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> On Jun 11, 2013, at 7:02 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>>> So, you are raising a new point then. You want the data model section to
> be
>>> replaced with a statement saying that JSON-LD serializes the "RDF['s
> data]
>>> model with two generalizations" citing terHorst for the
>>> "bnodes-for-predicates generalization".
>> No doubt that would not fly, so I will not attempt it. But how about
>> adding a sentence something like this to appendix A, end of first
>> paragraph:
>> "These definitions correspond closely, both in terminology and in
>> general structure, to the abstract syntax of RDF datasets and RDF
>> graphs."
> I would certainly be fine with this. I would also suggest to append the
> following sentence to your proposal
>    Complete details of how JSON-LD relates to RDF are in
>    C. Relationship to RDF.
> If no one objects, I will go ahead and implement these changes.


Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 13:16:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:59:34 UTC