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

Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:24:59 +0100
Cc: nathan@webr3.org, RDF Working Group <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Message-Id: <9B6FB778-1042-430B-BCF8-E5972DA44457@w3.org>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>

On Mar 25, 2011, at 11:58 , Steve Harris wrote:

[snip]

> 
>> Looking at this practically, most of our target market do not have the concept of multiple values, nor do they have support for multiple values in their stacks. They do however work with arrays and collections intensively.
>> 
>> I'd actually propose that we drop multiple value support and keep the [] notation for RDF collections.
>> 
>> To illustrate, if somebody has a property with multiple values for the label, they will typically write:
>> 
>> "labels": ["Foo", "Bar"],
>> 
>> Notice that's plural "labels" not singular "label", my way of language they are saying "this is a collection of labels", and that is the most common usage - indeed it's practically about the only option many developers have in their non-RDF tech stacks.
> 
> Sure, but I think that the variable cardinality is one of the most important features of RDF / graph stores in general.
> 

+1. I think it is more important to leave the possibility of variable cardinality because that seems to be a much more frequent usage. Dropping that in favour of collections is, I think, the wrong optimization...

Collections are rarely used though, where they are (eg, in encoding OWL) they are essential. I do not mind if their encoding is a bit esoteric (like the [[ ]]) syntax, that would not bother 80% or more of the users.

Ivan



>> This approach of only supporting RDF Collections (producing JS Arrays) makes sense to people. [[ ]] syntax and "multiple values" do not.
>> 
>> On the RDF side, surely we can create some properties if we need to? rdf:labels -> a collection of rdf:label relating to the subject.
> 
> I don't really see how that helps idiomatic usage myself, you still have a code difference for cardinality 1, v's > 1.
> 
> - Steve
> 
> -- 
> Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
> 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
> +44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
> Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
> Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
> 


----
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 Friday, 25 March 2011 11:25:28 UTC

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