- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:52:32 -0400
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <503BC1F0.1010100@openlinksw.com>
On 8/27/12 1:25 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > Yes, we could add something that prohibits a key in a JSON-LD object from having the form of a BNode; I don't think this would really loose anything. The grammar in A.1 should say: > > [[[ > Keys are IRIs, compact IRIs, terms defined within the active context which MUST evaluate to absolute IRIs, or one of the following keywords > ]]] > > or words to that effect. > > I would support removing that note, but I think the original came as a result of lobbying by Kingsley Huh? Of what to you speak? Give me a link so I can put your comment in context that's easy for me to understand etc. Whenever I use the word "Key" its in the context of a DBMS key, and typically when analogizing the effects of a Linked Data style of de-referencable URI. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Monday, 27 August 2012 18:52:56 UTC