[openbiblio-dev] JISC openbib update

Wed May 4 15:33:37 UTC 2011

* [2011-05-04 16:25:05 +0100] Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org> écrit:

] But we're not interested in RDF/JSON (since no-one who does JSON who
] is not already involved in the semantic web will be interested). If
] RDF/JSON is all we can do why not just use our big sparql endpoint and
] be done with it (exaggerating a bit but not not much ...)

Who is we?

] How badly do these problems affect us in, say, bibliographica.org (as
] opposed to the general case)?

Badly.

] But our current dictiziation / serialization is certainly no better
] than JSON-LD and arguably worse. That is what JSON-LD was proposed for
] (not some general let's serialize arbitrary RDF ...)

Right, so if we don't want to do it properly we should just stick with
what we have. The marginal benefit of moving to JSON-LD is small if it
is just special case code for bibliographica.

] a) RDF/JSON seems to be the only thing serializable (not surprising
] since it basically is RDF)

No, JSON-LD (CURIE) is serialisable. It just isn't predictable which
means you push the burden onto the client of turning it back into RDF
or back onto the server to hand-code things.

] b) But RDF/JSON is no good for general consumers (the very reason we
] are creating the JSON APIs)

There's no problem having an RDF/JSON serialisation along side the
frankenbibliojson. It does make things easier for e.g. JavaScript UI
work where you actually care about the meaning of the data. And as was
proven, is easy to do.

-w

-- 
William Waites                <mailto:ww at styx.org>
http://river.styx.org/ww/        <sip:ww at styx.org>
F4B3 39BF E775 CF42 0BAB  3DF0 BE40 A6DF B06F FD45