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

Normative vs. non-normative in JSON-LD (Re: JSON-LD skipping CR?)

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:45:56 +0100
Cc: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <6372FB82-CF21-430E-9CA3-55AF94000670@w3.org>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
I was looking at the document:


And I realized that almost the normative parts in the document are Appendix A, B, C, and E. Which is fine with me. However, Appendix C (Relationship to RDF) refers to RDF11-CONCEPTS non-normatively which I do not think is right. It also refers to RDF-SCHEMA which should, at some point, be changed to RDF11-SCHEMA as a normative reference. RDF11-CONCEPTS is also referenced from appendix E and again, it should be normative.

Bottom line: I believe JSON-LD should normatively refer to RDF11 CONCEPTS and the upcoming 1.1 version of RDF Schemas. That, however, does not make it possible to turn it into a PR before the other documents are at least in CR. We can, of course, skip CR for JSON-LD and leave it on hold as a LC, but that would not buy us any time. (Although it would make it easier to process because we would have one admin hurdle with a transition call less.)


On Mar 29, 2013, at 04:45 , Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

> Have we talked about the possibility of skipping CR for JSON-LD?   
> It has a lot of implementations and a test suite; if the implementations have passed the test suite by the end of LC, then CR isn't necessary.
> If this is a possibility, we should be sure to point this out in the SOTD -- making it both LC and a "Call for Implementations".   For example, see:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-sparql11-query-20120724/
> Just a thought.
>         -- Sandro

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Friday, 29 March 2013 10:46:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:26 UTC