W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > April 2012


From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 15:51:45 -0400
Message-ID: <4F8DC9D1.3080706@digitalbazaar.com>
To: "mark@coactus.com" <mark@coactus.com>
CC: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On 04/17/2012 03:29 PM, mark@coactus.com wrote:
> Hi Markus,
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Markus Lanthaler
> <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>  wrote:
>>> {"name":"Mark","city":"Ottawa"}
>> It is valid JSON-LD but not valid linked data as there's no way to map those
>> two properties (name&  city) to a IRI. You would need a context to do so.
> Understood about the context, but I don't understand the distinction
> you make there.
> It's certainly not a serialized RDF graph; is that what you mean by
> "not valid linked data"?
> But what does it mean that it's valid JSON-LD? I tried it in the
> playground, and it yielded the same result as an empty dictionary.

What did you try specifically? You can click the "permalink" button and 
then run the result through a URL compressor (which we should add to the 
playground but haven't gotten around to it) like I did here:


If you add context to your data (as mentioned previously) either through 
an HTTP-header, inline, or through an API call (as in the playground 
example I linked to) you can make that Mark/Ottawa example valid 
JSON-LD. You can see that it doesn't produce an empty dictionary when 
compacting, expanding, converting to turtle, etc.

What it means to be "valid JSON-LD" here is that each of the properties 
in your object have an associated IRI. Those associations can be made 
"after-the-fact" via the "@context" object I mentioned and put in the 
above example. This way you can turn your existing JSON into "valid 
JSON-LD" when you're ready to move to Linked Data land.

Dave Longley
Digital Bazaar, Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2012 19:52:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:53:19 UTC