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

Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room

From: Zhe Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:40:31 -0700
Message-ID: <4D8A4CAF.6040803@oracle.com>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
  Hi Richard,

Actually I am not objecting to having a simple adapter/conversion/transformation between RDF and JSON.
This transformation, however, can lean either towards RDF, or JSON. For me to make a good decision,
I need to understand why some developers are so unwilling to deal with RDF. If there is a good
justification, then we probably should make sure that the transformed result does not look in anyway like
RDF, not even remotely :)

Zhe


> Zhe,
>
> On 23 Mar 2011, at 18:17, Zhe Wu wrote:
>> Fundamentally, I think it is not hard to a developer to be able to learn a bit RDF and
>> start consuming data in triples. It is not the same as requesting that developer to fully understand
>> graph modeling, semantics, etc.
>>
>> It is just another data source.
> Well that's an interesting opinion, but this WG has been chartered [1] to produce an RDF syntax in JSON. That decision has been made after a survey [2] that indicated a strong desire for this feature [3], both from W3C members and the general RDF user community. That's why we now discuss how to best meet this obligation imposed by the charter.
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/rdf-wg-charter
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/rdf-2010/results
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/rdf-2010/results#xg3
>
>
>
>> Zhe
>>
>>> Until there is something to replace the 'M' in the LAMP
>>> stack for RDF applications, we're not going to see a change in the way
>>> Web developers develop.
>>>
>>> For example, our company needs to store roughly 100 billion+ triples per
>>> year of financial transaction data. We're currently using a home-built
>>> MySQL solution for our storage mechanism, we will probably migrate to
>>> MongoDB in time. We have no free, open source choice for storing this
>>> information - nobody does. So the idea that the average web developer is
>>> backed by a triple store is a terrible assumption to make. The only
>>> thing that even remotely comes close to scaling for us is MongoDB and
>>> MongoDB speaks JSON (specifically, BSON).
>>>
>>> When you have a triple store and SPARQL, you tend to see the world
>>> differently. Much of the world doesn't have a triple store, so they
>>> don't share the world view that roughly half of this working group shares.
>>>
>>> -- manu
>>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 19:41:17 UTC

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