- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:16:50 +0000
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Makes sense to me :) Ivan Herman wrote: > Nathan, > > as some people have already reflected on this list: there is currently a discussion on what the best way of handling RDF/JSON would be. One of the options W3C is contemplating is to have it part of the upcoming RDF Working Group which, if everything is goes as I would hope, should begin its work early next year. Although this decision has not yet been made, what about keeping to this list for the moment? I sincerely hope the decision will be taken in a matter of weeks. If the end decision is that the RDF/JSON would not be done by the RDF WG, then the options of a separate working group, an incubator group, or anything similar become viable options. > > Cheers > > Ivan > > > > On Nov 29, 2010, at 18:12 , Nathan wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> What are the odds of getting a group (pref through w3c) set-up quickly so that all of those working on and interesting in RDF+JSON can openly discuss, align and essentially do the heavy lifting pre-standardization? >> >> I'm very aware that there are multiple people with multiple approaches all working at the same time here, some communication but not loads, and that we could all either align and make progress, or end up with another 5 semi-supported rdf+json variants before any official effort starts, which wouldn't really be ideal. >> >> Best, >> >> Nathan >> > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:17:44 UTC