[uf-dev] JSON representation of semantic objects

[Duncan Cragg]

Kevin - you missed off the wrapper - 'haudio' itself.

Would this be simple enough still? :

{ "haudio":
  {"fn":"Start Wearing Purple",
  "contributor":"Gogol Bordello",
  "album":"Underdog World Strike"
} }

The wrapping tag provides context that disambiguates the sub-elements ..

   .. and that could be the crux of this whole debate!


> Several reasons:
> 1. ..
> 2. ..
> 3. ..
> While the example you give is the simplest representation of a semantic
> object, it is not good enough ..

Any lossy serialisation depends on common understanding and agreement
to fill in the missing information with assumption and convention.

In other words, once triggered by 'haudio', it is possible for the
simple representation to carry as much actual /information/ as the
complex one.  This is related to the 'no namespaces' arguments we all
know.  It depends on the volume of prior, mutual and globally shared
agreement you can achieve.

It's going to be a matter of feeling, not logic, I suspect, on which
side you fall - but anyone venturing onto uf-discuss with discussion
around 'competing' technologies needs to know they're not likely to
meet people who feel the same on core issues.   =0)

_________________________________
Duncan Cragg
Web Application Architect
The Financial Times Group (UK)
http://www.ft.com
http://duncan-cragg.org/blog/