W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2011

Re: JSON Emergency Brake

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:10:42 +0100
Cc: Alexandre Passant <alex@seevl.net>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <B82CFFAB-A2F2-404A-A2B1-5780741D1105@cyganiak.de>
To: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 18:10, Alexandre Passant <alex@seevl.net> wrote:
>> I guess that the link to an external @context could do the job. You
>> can also have this context automatically generated by the app, that's
>> how we're doing it in Seevl.
>> From my POV, removing all CURIES from the JSON itself, and
>> keeping namespaces only in the context (ideally in an external
>> document, so that the "data file" is completely namespace-less, as
>> RDFa profiles) is the best way to reach Web-dev that are not semweb
>> geeks. And the way RDF should go to have a JSON serialisation (and RDF
>> data !) that can reach the masses.

Strong +1.

Context in the data file, and CURIEs everywhere, are two things that will not work, because they're noise when one looks with JSON goggles.

> "Link headers, the mullet of the Web: business in the front, party in
> the back. Idea: serve #JSON, make it #jsonLD by a @context Link
> header."

Are you talking about the Link: HTTP header? That doesn't make sense. Why would you use an HTTP header for something that's specific to a single representation format? What's the advantage over putting it into the representation format?

Received on Thursday, 25 August 2011 13:11:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:08 UTC