Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements

Hi Manu,

I'm sorry if I missed anything, I didn't follow [JSON] too closely, but has there been any discussion/writeup on use cases for RDF-in-JSON?

I'm tempted to argue that the format should be the simplest thing that could possibly work. Perhaps a list of objects, each with "s", "p", "o" keys, plus bits for node types, datatypes, language tags.

My impression is that some in the TF would strongly disagree with that, and have something completely different in mind, and I'd like to understand what they actually want to *do* with the format.

I think a wiki page that lists use cases would be terrific.

Best,
Richard



On 6 Mar 2011, at 20:46, Manu Sporny wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I have ACTION-16[1], which is to effectively summarize positions on RDF
> in JSON in an attempt to figure out the starting document for the JSON
> work. While attempting to summarize positions, I realized very quickly
> that not everyone in the Task Force had responded and even when they
> did, I found it difficult to tease the nuances out of their statements.
> 
> So, instead I've placed a quick survey up on the wiki. I hope that this
> will be more accurate than attempting to summarize positions (and
> inevitably getting someones position wrong).
> 
> I have already sent this link out to the RDF WG JSON TF (acronym
> c-c-c-combo!)
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON#RDF_in_JSON_Design_Requirements
> 
> If you are not in the JSON TF but would like to express your position,
> please do so by following the link above and noting your preferences
> under the section titled "RDF in JSON Design Requirements".
> 
> -- manu
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/16
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Towards Universal Web Commerce
> http://digitalbazaar.com/2011/01/31/web-commerce/
>

Received on Sunday, 6 March 2011 21:21:54 UTC