Hi Jeni!
2010/1/7 Jeni Tennison j...@jenitennison.com:
Thanks for the pointer! The compact (natural) example that you give at [1]
is pretty much what I'd like to see as the JSON generated by default by a
linked data API. Have you used this in anger anywhere?
No and yes. :) That is, I haven't
Hi Niklas,
On 4 Jan 2010, at 22:32, Niklas Lindström wrote:
Gluon is a JSON format for RDF. It has a full syntax covering
properties, resource references, bnodes and literals with optional
datatype or language. With profiles, more more succinct forms are
possible.
Thanks for the pointer! The
Hi all!
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Mike Bergman m...@mkbergman.com wrote:
Hi Dave,
Dave Reynolds wrote:
Dave Reynolds wrote:
Jeni Tennison wrote:
I don't know where the best place is to work on this: I guess at some
point it would be good to set up a Wiki page or something that we
There was also some
recent discussion at W3C about opening up Git or Mercurial distributed
versioning systems for the standards community, which sounds like it
could be a good fit for SemWeb IG-and-nearby collaborations. However
that is at an early stage. Google Code might be easiest for
Dave Reynolds wrote:
Jeni Tennison wrote:
I don't know where the best place is to work on this: I guess at some
point it would be good to set up a Wiki page or something that we
could use as a hub for discussion?
I'd suggest setting up a Google Code area and making anyone who is
Hi Jeni!
Thanks, that looks interesting, and the idea of supporting similar
mappings to XML and to CSV is very attractive.
I also find this attractive :)
But I couldn't actually work out how I would use it in the kind of
situation we find ourselves in. We have, for example, RDF like this:
An excellent summary of the state of play so far, Dave...count me in. :)
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Dave Reynolds
dave.e.reyno...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dave Reynolds wrote:
Jeni Tennison wrote:
I don't know where the best place is to work on this: I guess at some
point it would be
Hi Dave,
Dave Reynolds wrote:
Dave Reynolds wrote:
Jeni Tennison wrote:
I don't know where the best place is to work on this: I guess at some
point it would be good to set up a Wiki page or something that we
could use as a hub for discussion?
I'd suggest setting up a Google Code area
Hi Jeni:
Agree with this:
a normal developer would want to just get:
[{
book: http://example.org/book/book6;,
title: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
},{
Wondered if you'd seen the JSONC proposal coming from the Google Data API
work:
Hi,
As part of the
(Sorry for my last post. That'll learn me for composing in place.
Hamfistedly hit the wrong buttons.)
Hi Jeni:
Agree with this:
a normal developer would want to just get:
[{
book: http://example.org/book/book6;,
title: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
},{
In message c74badc3.20683%t.hamm...@nature.com, Hammond, Tony
t.hamm...@nature.com writes
Normal developers will always want simple.
Surely what normal developers actually want are simple commands whereby
data can be streamed in, and become available programmatically within
their chosen
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Richard Light
rich...@light.demon.co.uk wrote:
In message c74badc3.20683%t.hamm...@nature.com, Hammond, Tony
t.hamm...@nature.com writes
Normal developers will always want simple.
Surely what normal developers actually want are simple commands whereby data
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Jeni Tennison j...@jenitennison.com wrote:
Richard,
My opinion, based on the reactions that I've seen from enthusiastic,
hard-working developers who just want to get things done, is that we (the
data.gov.uk project in particular, linked data in general) are
Hi Damian:
Sorry 'bout that. I did indeed include the wrong link (I was logged in at at
the time). DeWitt's mail on the OpenSearch list is here:
http://groups.google.com/group/opensearch/msg/f2f724e0e3123150
Here he's advocating JSONC as a possible (and practical) way forward.
Cheers,
Tony
Hi Richard,
Isn't:
Give 'em RDF and tell them to develop better toolsets ...
exactly the approach that the RDF community has been pursuing for a
decade or two, with less than impressive results?
;)
Regards,
Mark
--
Mark Birbeck, webBackplane
mark.birb...@webbackplane.com
In message
eb19f3360912140143m291c464brb76379d3cc2b0...@mail.gmail.com, Dan
Brickley dan...@danbri.org writes
RDF tooling still has some rough edges, it must be said. I am as
enthusiastic about RDF as anyone (having been involved since 1997) but
I've also seen the predictable results where on
Hi Richard,
Despite the Bah, Humbug! tone of my previous mail, I am actually in favour
too. I just want to tease out the extent to which we would be giving
developers what they say they want, rather than what they could actually
use.
The value of JSON is surely that JSON support is
In message
eb19f3360912140217w109daf1ah3c9320fa3363d...@mail.gmail.com, Dan
Brickley dan...@danbri.org writes
With every passing year the RDF tools do get a bit better, but also
the old ones code rot a bit, or new things come along that need
supporting (GRDDL, RDFa etc.). What can be done in
Jeni Tennison wrote:
On 12 Dec 2009, at 22:27, Danny Ayers wrote:
I can't offer any real practical suggestions right away (a lot to
digest here!) but one question I think right away may some
significance: you want this to be friendly to normal developers - what
kind of things are they actually
Jeni Tennison wrote:
It's worth noting that most of these APIs support a callback= parameter
that makes the API return Javascript containing a function call rather
than simply the JSON itself. I regard this as an unquestionably
essential part of a JSON API, whether it uses RDF/JSON or RDFj or
Hi Jenni,
Jeni Tennison wrote:
On 13 Dec 2009, at 13:34, Dave Reynolds wrote:
I agree we want both graphs and SPARQL results but I think there is
another third case - lists of described objects.
I absolutely agree with you that lists of described objects is an
essential part of an API.
Mark Birbeck wrote:
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Jeni Tennison j...@jenitennison.com wrote:
One thing that we want to do is provide JSON representations of both RDF
graphs and SPARQL results. I wanted to run some ideas past this group as to
how we might do that.
Great again. :)
In the
On Monday 14. December 2009 11:17:37 Dan Brickley wrote:
I wish that kind of funding was easy to come
by, but it's not. A lot of the work we need to get done around here to
speed up progress is pretty boring stuff. It's not cutting edge
research, nor the core of a world-changing startup, nor a
2009/12/14 Richard Light rich...@light.demon.co.uk:
In message c74badc3.20683%t.hamm...@nature.com, Hammond, Tony
t.hamm...@nature.com writes
Normal developers will always want simple.
Surely what normal developers actually want are simple commands whereby data
can be streamed in, and
Damian Steer wrote:
On 12 Dec 2009, at 21:42, Jeni Tennison wrote:
Hi,
As part of the linked data work the UK government is doing, we're looking at
how to use the linked data that we have as the basis of APIs that are
readily usable by developers who really don't want to learn about RDF
Frederick,
Thanks, that looks interesting, and the idea of supporting similar
mappings to XML and to CSV is very attractive.
But I couldn't actually work out how I would use it in the kind of
situation we find ourselves in. We have, for example, RDF like this:
Hi Jeni,
Jeni Tennison wrote:
As part of the linked data work the UK government is doing, we're
looking at how to use the linked data that we have as the basis of APIs
that are readily usable by developers who really don't want to learn
about RDF or SPARQL.
Wow! Talk about timing. We are
Hi Jeni,
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Jeni Tennison j...@jenitennison.com wrote:
Hi,
As part of the linked data work the UK government is doing, we're looking at
how to use the linked data that we have as the basis of APIs that are
readily usable by developers who really don't want to
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Dave Reynolds
dave.e.reyno...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi Jeni,
[Rest of post snipped for now, I'll respond properly later. Seems like we
are on sufficiently similar wavelengths that it is just a matter of
working the details.]
I don't know where the best place
On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 21:42 +, Jeni Tennison wrote:
To put this in context, what I think we should aim for is a pure
publishing format that is optimised for approachability for normal
developers, *not* an interchange format. RDF/JSON [1] and the SPARQL
results JSON format [2] aren't
Dan is right on many front... (it usually true:-)
- I personally do not see a problem this being done on ESW, this does not mean
any type
of formal 'Association' with W3C (giving you a writing right is a matter of
setting up a
user for you and sending, eg, me or dan a mail to add you to the
Hi,
As part of the linked data work the UK government is doing, we're
looking at how to use the linked data that we have as the basis of
APIs that are readily usable by developers who really don't want to
learn about RDF or SPARQL.
One thing that we want to do is provide JSON
Hi Jeni,
One project, amongst other, in this trend is irON [1] (with its
irJSON[2] serialization profile).
Also note that a revision of this specification will be released in the
coming month or so based on the latest work we have done regarding the
development of some parsers. The biggest
Frederick Giasson wrote:
Hi Jeni,
One project, amongst other, in this trend is irON [1] (with its
irJSON[2] serialization profile).
Also note that a revision of this specification will be released in
the coming month or so based on the latest work we have done regarding
the development of
Jeni, marvellous that you're working on this, and marvellous that
you've thought this through an awful lot already.
I can't offer any real practical suggestions right away (a lot to
digest here!) but one question I think right away may some
significance: you want this to be friendly to normal
Damian Steer wrote:
On 12 Dec 2009, at 21:42, Jeni Tennison wrote:
Hi,
As part of the linked data work the UK government is doing, we're looking at
how to use the linked data that we have as the basis of APIs that are
readily usable by developers who really don't want to learn about RDF
Jeni Tennison wrote:
Hi,
As part of the linked data work the UK government is doing, we're
looking at how to use the linked data that we have as the basis of APIs
that are readily usable by developers who really don't want to learn
about RDF or SPARQL.
One thing that we want to do is
Hi Kingsley,
Why not use Jeni's dump as a usecase example/tutorial re. irON? A What
(for the problem), Why (for irON virtues) and a How (an example based
on the usecase presented). This is how you can formulate a very sharp
apex for the irON value pyramid. Also note, UK, US, and Aussie
38 matches
Mail list logo
