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 (RDF-ISSUE-132)

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:12:15 +0200
To: "'Peter F. Patel-Schneider'" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Cc: "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00dc01ce7d88$3f489a30$bdd9ce90$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 5:55 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> On 07/10/2013 08:14 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 11:01 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> >> On 07/10/2013 12:24 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:34 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> >>>
> >> I would like to see the first part of Appendix C adjusted to match
> >> Appendix A,
> >> something like:
> >>
> >> JSON-LD is a concrete RDF syntax
> >> <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-concrete-rdf-syntax> as
> >> described in
> >> [RDF11-CONCEPTS <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#bib-RDF11-
> >> CONCEPTS>].
> >> Hence, a JSON-LD document is an RDF document and a JSON document and
> >> correspondingly represents an instance of an extended RDF data
> model,
> >> namely
> >> generalized RDF datasets [link]. The extension to the RDF data model
> >> is:
> >>
> >>    * In JSON-LD properties
> >>      <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-property> can be
> IRIs
> >>      <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-iri> or blank
> nodes
> >>      <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-blank-node>
> whereas in
> >>      properties (predicates) in RDF datasets have to be IRIs
> >>      <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-iri>.
> >>
> >> Summarized, these differences mean that JSON-LD is capable of
> >> serializing any
> >> RDF graph or dataset and most, but not all, JSON-LD documents can be
> >> directly
> >> interpreted as RDF datasets. It is possible to work around this
> >> restriction,
> >> when interpreting JSON-LD as RDF, by transforming blank nodes
> >> <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-blank-node> used as
> >> properties
> >> <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-property> to IRIs
> >> <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#dfn-iri>, minting new
> "Skolem
> >> IRIs"
> >> as per Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs
> >> <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-skolemization> of
> >> [RDF11-CONCEPTS <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#bib-RDF11-
> >> CONCEPTS>].
> >> The normative algorithms for interpreting JSON-LD as RDF and
> >> serializing RDF
> >> as JSON-LD are specified in the JSON-LD Processing Algorithms and
> API
> >> specification [JSON-LD-API
> >> <http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#bib-JSON-LD-API>].
> > Fixed in https://github.com/json-ld/json-
> ld.org/commit/9855519a1cd78f45b721635857c28fdc865d353a
> >
> > Live at http://json-ld.org.local/spec/latest/json-ld/#relationship-
> to-rdf
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Markus Lanthaler
> > @markuslanthaler
> >
> >
> >
> Hmm.  The changes there don't correspond very closely with my suggested
> changes.   However, this is not something that I care enough about to
> pursue
> much further.

Sorry, that was not intentional. I didn't realized that the removal of the other two bullet points was intentional. Since you say you don't care enough I would prefer to leave them in as other people might care and that's what we've come up with before (and had consensus).

So, do these changes and the "fractional part" clarification as discussed on today's telecon (which I already implemented in the spec [1]) address your concerns so that we can close ISSUE-132 [2]?


Thanks,
Markus


[1] https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/commit/70db9f9e3593b6cc5957be7534bca655577de53c
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/132



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 16:12:55 UTC

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