- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:46:14 -0500
- To: Sven R.Kunze <sven.kunze@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>
- Cc: public-rdf-comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:38 PM, Sven R.Kunze wrote: > Good evening everybody, > > there is still one open question I’d like to have an official response for. I think I already know the answer however it seems the spec should again clearly take position on that. > > What are the semantics of the JSON-LD data model? Especially, when being a generalization, which could slightly influence semantics in non-obvious ways. > > I just want to make sure that everything (which I presume) that is true for RDF semantics is still true for JSON-LD semantics and in which way changes/adds the extension of the RDF data model additional “pieces of semantics” to it. The main generalizations of the JDON-LD data model over the RDF one are allowing bnodes in property position, which is handled by the RDF semantics without requiring any change, and allowing bnodes as graph labels in datasets. As dataset graph labels have no RDF semantics, that second generalization has no semantic consequences. So yes, you can hallucinate the RDF model theory onto JSON-DL without anything bad happening. To actually write it out in detail would require being very careful about things like JSON-native numbers and so on, but that is all pretty semantically obvious. Pat Hayes > > Sven > > PS: > It is especially necessary to address that issue in the spec (with one single sentence for instance) as the spec already uses the term ‘sematic‘. > There is no document “JSON-LD semantics” anywhere AFAIK. ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 14 June 2013 21:46:43 UTC