W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-socialweb@w3.org > September 2014

Re: JSON-LD vs. JSON: pro vs. con?

From: <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 18:05:05 +0200
Cc: "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D9BEF7BC-18E3-41A7-9DC5-748516474079@bblfish.net>
To: Halpin Harry <hhalpin@w3.org>

On 24 Sep 2014, at 17:40, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:
> The last meeting with had a quite vigorous discussion of JSON and JSON-LD.
> I'd like to see folks who want JSON-LD as a requirement justify their
> position, and folks who would like to see it as an option but not
> required justify their position.
> Let the fun begin :)

Ok. Hope this is the last time we do this:

+1 for JSON-LD as a requirement
 with the priviso: where it makes sense.
For example it is possible to put RDF in an HTTP Link header
using https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988 

Or if someone publishes the data in HTML there
are a number of solutions there that integrate better with those.

But given that the WG has as agreed to a JSON based syntax and in
the circumstances where that makes sense here is the reasons to 
go for that as a MUST.

 two syntaxes are a lot more work to do than 0 - because JSON-LD
 would essentially remove the need to do anything more on syntax.
 This will save the Working Group a lot of time - a lot more than
 for example a healthy debate on use cases would have. 
  Even one syntax is a lot of work. The Atom working group lasted well
 over two years because of debates about what things would be attributes
 or elements, etc, etc... ie a load of syntactic issues that we can skip
 over quickly leaving us with the already difficult logical issues.

 it makes implementations easier: they no longer have to implement two
 parsers: one JSON-LD and a JSON one.

 we get Linked Data principles out of the box with JSON-LD, which means
 it will work well with other frameworks such as html data annotations etc,
 and we are distributed from the ground up

 we can make sure the data modelling is good by using tools and experience
which have been developed over 15 years in Universities, Governments, Companies
etc. around the world.

 we tie in with the Linked Data Platform that just recently made JSON-LD a
must support

 support for JSON-LD is growing fast

All of this does not stop people in a seperate group having a JSON pure syntax
and writing an mapper for that to the JSON-LD using a tool such as Antonio
Garrotes https://github.com/antoniogarrote/json-ld-macros . But the group here
does not need to spend time on solving a problem that does not need solving -
ie that has already been solved for us by JSON-LD. There are a lot of highly 
paid engineers here and we can't afford to waste their time.


>  yours,
>     harry

Social Web Architect
Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2014 16:05:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:26:12 UTC