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

Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements

From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:21:18 +0000
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDF Working Group <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3E5F8855-A1FB-44B2-BF44-FF962EA49F4C@deri.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>

> What I am trying to find is the sweet spot that would create a  
> bridge between them and those Web Application Developers who do not  
> know RDF or, worse, who are averse to RDF because they see it as too  
> complex, researchy, etc (I think we all met these various memes  
> around that). Doesn't that mean that to please those a JSON/RDF must  
> be damn simple (even if it does not cover the whole of RDF), and  
> maybe also include shorthands to make it even simpler (eg, default  
> subjects to see only property value pairs, etc). At first glance  
> this hints at something like the 's', 'p', 'o' format of Andy with  
> some defaults here and there...
>
> Put it another way, I am not sure our goal is to build a JSON  
> serialization that would compete with Turtle. Only with N-Triples...

+1

I think you have a very valid point, here. I came up with a proposal,  
called JTriples [1] - not pretty, still some open issues (re literals)  
but might serve as a basis for exploration.

Cheers,
	Michael
[1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/JTriples
--
Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html

On 7 Mar 2011, at 12:13, Ivan Herman wrote:

> I have a slightly more general requirement, and I miss these in the  
> various items below.
>
> I believe the reason of doing JSON/RDF is not to please the  
> application developers who already know and are happy to use RDF.  
> After all, for those, whether using Turtle or JSON as a  
> serialization does not really mean a difference: it is all just text.
>
> What I am trying to find is the sweet spot that would create a  
> bridge between them and those Web Application Developers who do not  
> know RDF or, worse, who are averse to RDF because they see it as too  
> complex, researchy, etc (I think we all met these various memes  
> around that). Doesn't that mean that to please those a JSON/RDF must  
> be damn simple (even if it does not cover the whole of RDF), and  
> maybe also include shorthands to make it even simpler (eg, default  
> subjects to see only property value pairs, etc). At first glance  
> this hints at something like the 's', 'p', 'o' format of Andy with  
> some defaults here and there...
>
> Put it another way, I am not sure our goal is to build a JSON  
> serialization that would compete with Turtle. Only with N-Triples...
>
> Ivan
>
>
> On Mar 6, 2011, at 21:46 , 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/
>>
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 12:22:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:03 UTC