Hi Manu,

On May 30, 2010, at 23:33 , Manu Sporny wrote:
> Would this WG be amenable to publishing this spec as a FPWD (after about
> another month or two of work on it)? It deals with representing Web-wide
> objects between User Agents and Web Services. It is geared as a
> standards-based replacement of SOAP... REST + JSON-LD.

I don't want to speak for this WG, and I'd rather we looked more closely at 
technology before thinking about publication. I think we ought to point out 
that rechartering WebApps isn't the easiest thing ever, so that adding 
deliverables might prove tricky no matter what.

More constructively, I have two very quick comments:

  - This is an interesting project, but I don't think that you want to set out 
with the goal of producing a replacement for SOAP. You want your goal to be 
something like the exchange of semantically rich information using JSON that 
addresses the needs of a large segment of the Web community. If it helps bring 
SOAP to the horrible death it so dearly deserves, fine, but that's a 
side-effect.

  - Your approach is built on the idea of encoding RDF or RDF-like models into 
JSON. That has the downside of requiring people who already have and use 
JSON-based exchange systems to change their data. Experience tends to show that 
that's rarely a very popular option. Have you considered taking a more 
GRDDL-like road and providing a way to map existing JSON to a richer, more 
contextualised semantic model? This has the double advantage that 1) people can 
keep their JSON as is, and 2) if a data source doesn't want to perform that 
mapping, you can do it for them and everyone's happy (it's never been about 
"evolution" versus "revolution", only about what strategy you have to introduce 
new technology without being smothered by the gargantuan laziness that's 
inherent in any decoupled system). I'd recommend taking a good look at JSON 
Schema in this context. Notably, they've been adding ways of mapping simple 
values to links from the schema, and those links can be typed (as in @rel). I 
haven't gone through the motions, but I think that this gives you a lot of 
power in mapping JSON to something RDFy.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/




Reply via email to