 |
 |
What *does* seem to be core in this blog post is the use of http URIs for values. I'd add to that: properties defined with http URIs, so you know what you are describing. Although you can serialize all of this in JSON if you wish, it means that you have started with LD concepts, not the usual JSON application. Underneath it all you still have to have something that expresses valid triples, n'est pas? kc On 2/15/12 5:49 AM, Jon Phipps wrote: > I've been doing some wandering around in JSON land for the last few days > and, as part of a continuing observation that RDF is an implementation > detail rather than a core requirement, I'd like to point to this post from > James Snell > http://chmod777self.blogspot.com/2012/02/mostly-linked-data.html > And the JSON Scema spec: http://json-schema.org/ > > Jon, > who may someday get his act together and pay attention to these meetings > more than a couple of hours before the meeting. > > On Tuesday, February 14, 2012, Thomas Baker<[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 05:25:17PM -0500, Tom Baker wrote: >>> -- that DCAM should be developed using a test-driven approach, with >>> effective examples and test cases that can be expressed in various >>> concrete syntaxes. >> >> Jon suggested that we take Gordon's requirements for metadata record > constructs >> [1] as a starting point. As I understand them, these are: >> >> -- the ability to encode multicomponent things (which in the cataloging >> world happen to be called "statements", as in "publication statement" >> and "classification statement") either: >> >> -- as unstructured strings, or >> -- as strings structured according to a named Syntax Encoding Scheme, > or >> -- as Named Graphs with individual component triples >> >> -- the ability to express the repeatability of components in such > "statements" >> >> -- the ability to designate properties as "mandatory", or "mandatory if >> applicable", and the like >> >> -- the ability to constrain the cardinality of "subsets of properties" >> within a particular context, such as the FRBR model >> >> -- the ability to express mappings between properties in different > namespaces. >> >> It has also been suggested that we find examples of real metadata instance >> records from different communities and contexts -- e.g., libraries, > government, >> industry, and biomed -- for both testing and illustrating DCAM constracts. >> >> Tom >> >> [1] > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1202&L=dc-architecture&P=6405 >> >> -- >> Tom Baker<[log in to unmask]> >> > -- Karen Coyle [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet