- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 21:58:18 +0000
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDF Working Group <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi Richard, I agree, needs written up in a usecases for json wiki page, if you can't wait that long then do see the thread which started here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Feb/0072.html What you mention is "RDF in JSON", something which nobody seems that keen to do, although I still maintain we need both! Best, Nathan Richard Cyganiak wrote: > 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 21:59:01 UTC