Re: Re-definition of Linked Data

• From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
• Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:51:03 -0400
• To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
• CC: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
• Message-ID: <51BF5A97.5010401@dbooth.org>

On 06/17/2013 01:43 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> If the W3C's RDF group is to endorseJSON-LD as a recommended concrete
> syntax for RDF, then it is natural (and basic common sense) for said
> workgroup to define Linked Data using the bullet points outlined in
> TimBL's revised meme.

Okay, but I am confused about the details of what you are suggesting. 
Are you suggesting that the JSON-LD intro use the following list where 
it describes Linked Data?

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
[[
   1. Use URIs as names for things

   2. Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names.

   3. When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information, using the 
standards (RDF*, SPARQL)

   4. Include links to other URIs. so that they can discover more things.
]]

David

Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 18:51:33 UTC