- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 22:08:30 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 05/06/13 15:49, Dan Brickley wrote: > On 4 June 2013 23:45, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: >> I would find it very depressing if schema.org went with JSON-LD instead of Turtle. Why go to something that doesn't completely line up with RDF when there is finally a nice format for RDF? > > In what ways does JSON-LD not line up fully with RDF? Dan, There is some text at: http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld-syntax/#relationship-to-rdf Andy > > For schema.org's current primary audience - Web developers and > publishers - they are all very heavily immersed in JSON these last few > years, to the extent they're doing anything more technical than basic > HTML/CSS. > > Dan >
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 21:09:08 UTC