3 ms·

Not taking care of the semantics and letting [mostly] code take care of it is what I don’t like about that format. [standardization of @id and @type special att

• JimDabell 3y ago
  My point is that there’s no point in complaining that a JSON API doesn’t have any particular semantics like the ones you want. If an API says that the format it returns is “JSON”, then what it actually means is that it’s some ad hoc format cooked up on the spot that uses JSON syntax. The problem is not that JSON doesn’t include semantics – that’s out of scope for JSON – the problem is that the API in question half-assed its format design. > standardization of @id and @type special attributes by JSON-LD sound like a good step forward But those were standardised. In the JSON-LD spec. If you want a format that has specified semantics, use a format that has specified semantics. Like JSON-LD. JSON only solves the syntax part of the problem, by design. It’s not there to define semantics, that’s what formats built on top of JSON do.