- From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 10:06:07 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
@tilgovi said > Soo... is there any reason to adopt a change suggested by this issue? I think not. I would actually support the idea brought up just now by Erik wherein the spec sticks to pure JSON with some additional text about how to augment it for JSON-LD / RDF world (essentially, slap the context on it). I would love it if we recommended that anyone producing JSON-LD stick to the recommended context to make interop easier. This could also require (which I think would be a good idea) that the protocol would also return a link header to the appropriate `@context` following the [relevant section of the JSON-LD](http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#interpreting-json-as-json-ld) spec. It is not a major addition to the protocol, the extra load on Annotation Servers is minimal, but purely JSON clients would not have to actively disregard the `@context` property from the returned data (as they would have to do now). -- GitHub Notif of comment by iherman See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/52#issuecomment-120337456
Received on Friday, 10 July 2015 10:06:11 UTC