|
|
|
|
|
|
by hdhzy
3303 days ago
|
|
|
JSON-LD is RDF. Or rather is what RDF would look like if it was serialized in JSON instead of XML. If you look from the Semantic Web angle JSON-LD is just a serialization format, like e.g. Turtle, but using JSON as JSON is popular nowadays. Sometimes I wonder why this is not said directly, probably because Semantic Web and RDF are passe now. Actually the post's author addresses this point: > I made it a point to not mention RDF at all in the JSON-LD 1.0 specification because you didn’t need to go off and read about it to understand what was going on in JSON-LD. ... > Tests are defined into compact, expand, flatten, frame, normalize, and rdf sections These are just sub-formats of JSON-LD, information represented is the same but JSON looks a little bit different. Some sub-formats are easier for tools to process, some are better for humans. |
|
|
It seems to me that on one hand JSON-LD wanted to bootstrap the network effects by bringing along people who were doing RDF both technically (the JSON-LD spec says "JSON-LD is a concrete RDF syntax as described in [RDF11-CONCEPTS].") and socially (published by the RDF WG), but on the other hand the negative brand equity of RDF is recognized as an obstacle for bringing along even more people, hence the OP professing "Hate the Semantic Web" and "Kick RDF in the Nuts".
It's kinda weird how mentioning the RDF connection of JSON-LD in the sense of past experiences with RDF having any bearing on JSON-LD is treated as a social no-no. Despite the above-quoted bit from the spec saying "JSON-LD is a concrete RDF syntax as described in [RDF11-CONCEPTS].", we are supposed to play along with JSON-LD totally having nothing to do with RDF.