W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > July 2013

RE: Updated JSON-LD spec to more closely align w/ RDF data model

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 19:21:33 +0200
To: "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <031c01ce7811$c4db3300$4e919900$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 6:57 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> I guess that somehow my messages are not being completely understood.

Yeah, unfortunately I still doubt that I understand you completely.


> The thrust of my technical comments is to do away with the parallel set of
> definitions in the JSON-LD documents in favour of building on the definitions
> in the RDF documents.
> 
> Parallel sets of definitions are bad from just about every aspect one
> can imagine.

OK, so when we talk about a graph somewhere in the JSON-LD spec how do we define it? It's certainly not the same as an RDF graph.

For some things, like "language-tagged string", we could of course reference RDF Concepts... but I don't see much value in providing just a diff to RDF Concepts. The goal was to make the spec as self-contained as possible without requiring them to read, e.g., RDF Concepts.

The proposal you made in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Jun/0126.html presume that the reader is already familiar with the RDF data model. I expect that for most readers that won't be the case.

So, with that in mind, what would be the minimal changes to the Data Model section (http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#data-model) necessary to address your concerns?

How would you e.g., change the following definitions:

     A graph is a labeled directed graph, i.e., a set of nodes
     connected by edges.

     Every edge has a direction associated with it and is labeled
     with an IRI or a blank node identifier. Within the JSON-LD
     syntax these edge labels are called properties. Whenever
     practical, an edge SHOULD be labeled with an IRI.

     A language-tagged string consists of a string and a non-empty
     language tag as defined by [BCP47]. The language tag MUST be
     well-formed according to section 2.2.9 Classes of Conformance
     of [BCP47].


Thanks,
Markus


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 17:22:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:30 UTC