- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:40:00 +0200
- To: <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
On Thursday, June 13, 2013 12:01 PM, William Waites wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 19:28:28 +1000, Peter Ansell > <ansell.peter@gmail.com> said: > > > advantage if all users send documents in a particular profile of > > JSON-LD, (and they must reference a particular @context in the > > case of Web Payments), which will encourage the current > > inefficient practice of creating data serialisations to match > > specific APIs rather than programming for reuse and longevity > > using only the RDF Abstract Model. > > As I understand it, that's the point. JSON APIs work well because they > don't generalise. That makes them easy to use, and that's why people > use them. JSON-LD is supposed to give us a consistent way to interpret > these documents as RDF if we're interested in abstract longevity -- > without imposing any extra drag on the normal web developers who just > want to use simple dictionaries in a simple context. Exactly, it doesn't force developers to change their JSON representations overnight. It also doesn't force developers to use new tooling etc. They can re-use all their existing tooling and build on investments they made in their systems. > Now if we can do that, we have the best of both worlds. I can write a > little server API that does something, without worrying or thinking at > all about how it fits into the bigger picture. People can use my > service without having to get special tools. Then you can make a > profile with instructions for how you think it should fit in and use > specialised tools to work at the next level up. Right. It makes a lot of sense to process the data as JSON-LD because it means you can avoid a lot of code when dealing with multiple Web APIs e.g. All of them will become uniform even if they weren't in the first place. > I disagree with the strong de-emphasis on RDF in the JSON-LD > specifications though. It should say something more like, "if you use > JSON this way, it makes it possible to do all sorts of RDF semantic > web stuff with it, in fact it *is* RDF -- that's pretty cool, but if > you don't want to think about that, you don't have to". The document is primarily intended for the following audiences: [...] Software developers who want to generate or consume Linked Data, an RDF graph, or an RDF Dataset in a JSON syntax JSON-LD was designed to be usable by developers as idiomatic JSON, with no need to understand RDF [RDF11-CONCEPTS]. However, JSON-LD was also designed to be usable as RDF, so people intending to use JSON-LD with RDF tools will find it can be used like any other RDF syntax. Complete details of how JSON-LD relates to RDF are in C. Relationship to RDF. JSON-LD is a concrete RDF syntax as described in [RDF11-CONCEPTS]. Hence, a JSON-LD document is both an RDF document and a JSON document and correspondingly represents both an instance of the RDF data model and an instance of the JSON-LD data model [http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/] -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 10:40:34 UTC