TF-JSON - RDF Working Group Wiki
Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
TF-JSON
From RDF Working Group Wiki
Jump to:
Contents
JSON RDF Task Force
1.1
Sub-pages
1.2
Inputs
1.2.1
Materials from RDF Next Step WorkShop
1.2.1.1
Pros
1.2.1.2
Cons
1.3
Deliverables
1.4
Questions to Contemplate
1.5
Participants
JSON RDF Task Force
The JSON RDF Task Force is primarily responsible for creating a JSON serialization of RDF.
Sub-pages
JSON User Segments
- The segments of the Web developer community that are being addressed via this work.
Use cases
- A set of use cases that the group would like to support.
JSON Design Requirements
- A list of questions on particular design questions that are being considered.
Semantics of JSON
- Assumptions about the definition of JSON being used by this Working Group.
JSON Serialization Examples
- Examples of marking up content in each serialization language.
JSON Syntax Options
- A discussion of the various syntax options of the serializations introduced so far.
JSON-LD Data Model
JSON-LD Features at Risk
Inputs
RDF JSON
, by Talis.
JSON-LD
, by Manu Sporny.
JRON
by Sandro Hawke.
JSON serialization
in the Linked Data API.
SPARQL Query Results in JSON
by DAWG.
JSN3
by Nathan.
Flat triples approach to RDF graphs in JSON
by Dominik Tomaszuk
Ideas and issues from the community
from RDF Core Work Items build on RDF/NextStepWorkshop, are reproduced below.
JTriples
by Michael Hausenblas
RDFj
by Mark Birbeck
Materials from RDF Next Step WorkShop
Pros
Allows web authors (Javascript, HTML5, ... developers) more easily use rdf data with existing tools and techniques
Multiple JSON formats and implementations (some interoperable) already exist showing interest in this work
Cons
Current JSON formats are not aligned - differnent approaches - making it JSON-user friendly versus making it familiar to existing RDF users.
Needs some R&D and alignment.
Risk that the result would be some standard that would not be adopted if it was not 'web author' friendly.
Deliverables
JSON Serialization of RDF
Questions to Contemplate
What are the use cases for the JSON serialization?
Are we to create a lightweight JSON based RDF interchange format optimized for machines and speed, or an easy to work with JSON view of RDF optimized for humans (developers)?
Is it necessary for developers to know RDF in order to use the simplest form of the RDF-in-JSON serialization?
Should we attempt to support more than just RDF? Key-value pairs as well? Literals as subjects?
Must RDF in JSON be 100% compatible with the JSON spec? Or must it only be able to be read by a JavaScript library and thus be JSON-like-but-not-compatible (and can thus deviate from the standard JSON spec)?
Must all major RDF concepts be expressible via the RDF in JSON syntax?
Should we go more for human-readability, or terse/compact/machine-friendly formats? What is the correct balance?
Should there be a migration story for the JSON that is already used heavily on the Web? For example, in REST-based services?
Should processing be a single-pass or multi-pass process? Should we support SAX-like streaming?
Should there be support for
disjoint graphs
Should we consider how the structure may be
digitally signed
How should
normalization
occur?
Should
graph literals
be supported?
Should
named graphs
be supported?
Should
automatic typing
be supported?
Should
type coercion
be supported?
Should there be
an API
defined in order to easily map RDF-in-JSON to/from language-native formats?
Participants
Manu Sporny
Chris Matheus
Nathan Rixham
Andy Seaborne
Thomas Steiner
Matteo Brunati
David Wood
Pat Hayes
Sandro Hawke
Nicholas Humfrey
Markus Lanthaler
Retrieved from "
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Namespaces
Page
Discussion
Variants
Views
Read
View source
More
Main page
Charter
Tracker
E-Mail Archive
Public Comments
Repository
Index of documents
Tools
Special pages
This page was last modified on 2 April 2013, at 11:16.
About RDF Working Group Wiki
Disclaimers