W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > July 2014

Re: Turtle and JSON-LD Matter

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:08:14 -0400
Message-ID: <53C6A36E.2020107@openlinksw.com>
To: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
CC: "public-rww@w3.org" <public-rww@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
On 7/16/14 10:23 AM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
> Hi Kingsley,
>
>> >Is there any reason why Turtle and JSON-LD cannot be on equal 
>> footing in regards to the WebID spec?
>> >
>> >There's no reason why WebID-Profile documents MUST be comprised of 
>> RDF content in Turtle Notation.
> In general, several W3C specs demand the presence of a specific RDF 
> representation.
> (Linked Data Platform, R2RML, …)
>
> Seems indeed quite contradictory… why did we invent RDF in the first 
> place?:-)

Exactly the question that hits me in the head every time I look at an 
RDF language (system of signs, syntax, and semantics) based spec that 
prefers a specific notation via MUST.


>
> On the other hand, I see some necessity for interoperability, but still…

Interoperability isn't lost via Turtle and JSON-LD support in WebID-* .  
In fact, we increase interoperability via proper use of RDF and AWWW

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this



Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 16:08:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:10:47 UTC