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, 10 Jul 2013 09:24:55 +0200
To: "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00c301ce7d3e$94c0c9f0$be425dd0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:34 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Appendix A looks good, modulo an answer to my query about mixed types
> for JSON numbers.

Great. By your query about mixed types you mean the mapping to xsd:integer and xsd:double depending on the fractional part, right?

> Appendix C should mention the new generalized RDF datasets, I think,
> but the other changes look OK.

It does:

   In JSON-LD properties can be IRIs or blank nodes whereas in RDF
   properties (predicates) have to be IRIs. This means that JSON-LD
   serializes *generalized RDF Datasets*.

with "generalized RDF Datasets" being a link to the definition in RDF Concepts. Do you think we need to add another sentence? Could you please propose one.

> Given the issues with respect to numbers in JSON, I would change
> http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-number, but what to change
> it to depends on just what JSON numbers are supposed to be. Certainly mixed
> integers and double floats is not a numeric type in any programming language
> that I am familiar with.

Please don't forget that it is a serialization format and not a in-memory data model. Maybe we should make it clearer that the representation of numbers is similar to that used in most programming languages!?

> Similarly, JSON strings don't really represent (just) Unicode characters, but
> the distinctions here might be too obtruse for even this document.

Yeah, please don't let's start about talking unpaired surrogates here. I haven't ever seen this being a problem in practice so I consider this mostly a theoretical problem.

Markus Lanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 07:25:28 UTC

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