- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:58:45 +0200
- To: "'public-rdf-comments Comments'" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <009e01ce6824$fa69c470$ef3d4d50$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:20 PM, David Wood wrote: > On Jun 12, 2013, at 11:11, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:59 AM, David Wood wrote: > > > >> Hi Pat, > >> > >> Thanks for your careful review. Do you think these concerns could > be addressed in a minimal way by a reference to the RDF Primer in the > introduction? > > > > Yes for me, but I recognize that the extreme RDF-phobia which Manu > describes might mean they would not want to force readers to actually > read any RDF documents. So a brief intuitive account of the "JSON-DL > data model" would also do. It could just be a couple of sentences > saying that the data model assumes that data is in the form of a graph > of nodes using IRIs and some other stuff. > > > >> That would seem to help introduce the terms and, after all, JSON-LD > is a product of the RDF WG. That approach might also serve to quiet > the other discussions you mentioned. > > > > Well, lets just let that die quietly. I think the JSON editors have > leaned over backwards to accommodate our RDF bristles, so I dont want > to press that point any more. > > That's fine with me. Over to you, Manu, Markus and Greg. You seem to > be on the right track, IMO. OK, keeping track of it here: https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/263 -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 10:59:19 UTC