John F. Sowa wrote:
> The first point to emphasize is that the W3C is a very big organization
> with many people with a diverse range of opinions. In that sense, it is
> like IBM, which has many people like me who often ridicule the pomposity
> of some people who promote the official "party line."
> PDM> Are you saying that JSON should be 'acknowledged' by the W3C?
> The official dogma of the Semantic Web is "Thou shalt represent every
> kind of language in XML." Anything contrary to that dogma is "heresy"
> or, in IBM jargon, "counterstrategic".
> In any case, following is a W3C report that talks about using JSON
> for serializing the results of a SPARQL query:
JSON is now supported for both tabular and graph results serializations. (01)
If you look at an DBpedia page, you will notice RDF/JSON in the footer. (02)
Of course, we haven't waited on the W3C for any blessings, the community
has simply cracked on with it. (03)
Ditto HTML+RDFa, which provides a much lower activation threshold for
bootstrapping a Web of Linked Data than: JSON, N3/Turtle, or RDF/XML.
> That demonstrates that some people in the W3C recognize the value
> of JSON for representing the data, but they aren't ready to admit
> the heresy of claiming that a notation based on JSON might be
> superior to XML for representing the equivalent of RDF and OWL.
See my comments above, basically, there is only one thing second to
RDF/XML when it comes impediments to Semantic Web Project comprehension,
and its the wonderful notion of: information and non information
> But the idea of using JSON (and other notations) as a replacement
> or at least a supplement to XML isn't new. Following is an example:
> The history of religion shows that there are four ways of dealing with
> heretics: behead them, excommunicate them, ignore them, or co-opt them.
> To behead anyone who spouts heresy is illegal. To excommunicate
> them creates enemies that can cause a lot of trouble. To ignore them
> doesn't create enemies, but they can still be competitors. The best
> strategy is to co-opt them: welcome them into the community, adopt
> their approach, rename it, and make it official.
> My recommendation for the Semantic Web is to welcome the heresy and
> the heretics. Admit that the focus of the Semantic Web is semantics.
> The notation should be secondary, and JSON should be just as official
> as anything based on XML. Instead of fighting JSON, they should
> adopt it as a growth path for the future.
> Please don't tell anyone, but one reason why I want the Semantic Web
> to adopt JSON is that it would weaken the hold of XML as the official
> dogma. The next step in my secret strategy is to promote controlled
> natural languages for representing not only RDF and OWL, but a wide
> range of other notations for logic. See
I know, I am a major heretic on a mission :-) (04)
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO
OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com (08)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)