- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 12:48:26 +0200
- To: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 11:32 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > On 03/07/13 00:21, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: > > Meta-remark: > > > > It would be nice if, instead of proposing an alterative format to > > JSON-LD we could propose a controlled subset of JSON-LD that meets > the > > requirements that this format addresses. > > That would defeat the purpose of recording an existing format. > > http://docs.api.talis.com/platform-api/output-types/rdf-json Just a thought. Would it be a viable alternative if Ian (or someone else from Talis) would submit this as an *informational* RFC? The required process and effort is minimal and we would avoid a lot of potential confusion by publishing two JSON serializations in the RDF WG. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 10:48:58 UTC