I don't quite follow the whole hypertext problem. I mean URIs can be encoded as strings, there's no problem there.
HTML doesn't handle URIs any differently. They're just string attributes on elements(generally).
Is the problem that there aren't clients that can generally consume the JSON and find the hyperlinks? Is the idea that the JSON should be able to be rendered as a site kind of like the whole xml/xslt idea?
I guess I just don't get what the problem is here? What would built-in uri's look like?
HTML doesn't handle URIs any differently. They're just string attributes on elements(generally).
Sure it does, when it defines the semantics of the elements. HTML says "the 'href' attribute of the 'a' element is the URI of a linked resource". There's no special syntax, because it doesn't need to have; they're identified by their elements.
But on a more general format that doesn't define particular semantics to nodes, you have syntax that identifies URLs. For example, in Turtle - which is a format that I quite like - you encode strings using double quotes around the value, but URIs are encoded using angle brackets.
The advantage is that smart clients can parse that information and crawl the documents, generating useful data even if they don't necessarily understand this particular format. Think search engines, for example - they might not understand that <span id="author"> identifies the author's name, but they can still derive useful information for the web of pages that they crawl.
Comments
I don't quite follow the whole hypertext problem. I mean URIs can be encoded as strings, there's no problem there.
HTML doesn't handle URIs any differently. They're just string attributes on elements(generally).
Is the problem that there aren't clients that can generally consume the JSON and find the hyperlinks? Is the idea that the JSON should be able to be rendered as a site kind of like the whole xml/xslt idea?
I guess I just don't get what the problem is here? What would built-in uri's look like?
HTML doesn't handle URIs any differently. They're just string attributes on elements(generally).
Sure it does, when it defines the semantics of the elements. HTML says "the 'href' attribute of the 'a' element is the URI of a linked resource". There's no special syntax, because it doesn't need to have; they're identified by their elements.
But on a more general format that doesn't define particular semantics to nodes, you have syntax that identifies URLs. For example, in Turtle - which is a format that I quite like - you encode strings using double quotes around the value, but URIs are encoded using angle brackets.
Example:
The advantage is that smart clients can parse that information and crawl the documents, generating useful data even if they don't necessarily understand this particular format. Think search engines, for example - they might not understand that <span id="author"> identifies the author's name, but they can still derive useful information for the web of pages that they crawl.