- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:50:47 -0500
- To: RDF Working Group <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 03/09/11 02:24, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > Extend existing JSON API with ability to store arbitrary RDF data > > ACME Corp is operating a website with a JSON API. They want to give > users the ability to store arbitrary additional data alongside > certain objects managed via the API. For example, when a user account > is created via the API, the client app should be able to also submit > a digital signature or “My upcoming trips” data. The client app would > be able to use that data on subsequent requests. To avoid accidental > clashes between fields used by different client apps, ACME Corp wants > to use RDF as the data model. Nevertheless, they want to keep the > impact on the existing JSON API and existing clients to a minimum. > > > Does this capture the intent? Any major aspects to the server-side > story that this is missing? Thanks Richard. Yes, it captures the intent of /a/ use case. I don't know if they're the same use case or not. I've split that use case into two separate use cases. http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON#Migrating_to_Semantic_Web_Services http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON#Generalized_storage_of_Semantic_Data_in_Web_Services Rather than attempting to explain the differences between the two, is it clear what the differences between the two are by reading the wiki text? -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Payment Standards and Competition http://digitalbazaar.com/2011/02/28/payment-standards/
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 19:51:19 UTC