W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > July 2011

Re: About @type, @ and other tokens

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 20:10:25 -0400
Message-ID: <4E1A3F71.60702@digitalbazaar.com>
To: public-linked-json@w3.org
On 07/08/2011 11:07 AM, Alexandre Passant wrote:
> Regarding the "@source instead of @" and "@type instead of a" issues
> on the current spec.
> I'd favor a way to let this be defined in a context, in addition to
> the default value.
> 
> E.g.
> 
> {
>   "@context":
>   {
>      "#tokens":
>      {
>        "@" : "uri",
>        "@type" : "type"
>      }
>   }
> }

Why not just this?

"@context":
{
   "@subject": "iri",
   "@type": "a",
   "@datatype": "type",
   ...
}

Granted, this could be considered confusing as the keywords mean
something very different when used in the context than elsewhere, but
the same concern applies to their use in #tokens above.

> I will make the spec more flexible as allowing people to use the
> naming they prefer - while keeping the RDF similar.

If we do this, I think that we should declare some good defaults so that
people don't have to declare a "@context" if they don't want to do so.

I'm also concerned that this feature may not be as useful as we think it
may be. That is, can somebody show us a use case that exists today that
would benefit from this feature? I'm sure one exists, but I'd like to
see how it could be applied to a major JSON Web services deployment
(like Twitter, Google maps, Facebook, etc.)

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarm Developer Tools and Demo Released
http://digitalbazaar.com/2011/05/05/payswarm-sandbox/
Received on Monday, 11 July 2011 00:10:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:53:17 UTC