W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > August 2015

RE: JSON-LD Context

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 07:14:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7Rbc9BZNTXq0_FxyM3D5ndX9su-yiMMO0D+bK26-qC-PYjg@mail.gmail.com>
To: t-cole3@illinois.edu
Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Web Annotation <public-annotation@w3.org>, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Using @vocab essentially makes it difficult to impossible to use your
context with any other context without experiencing unintended and
unexpected results. I definitely recommend treading carefully.
On Aug 8, 2015 10:54 AM, "Timothy Cole" <t-cole3@illinois.edu> wrote:

> Ivan-
>
> I'm going off of the following paragraph from Section 6.5 of the JSON-LD
> 1.0 Recommendation [http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#type-coercion], which
> says:
>
> ***Type coercion is specified within an expanded term definition using the
> @type key. The value of this key expands to an IRI. Alternatively, the
> keywords @id or @vocab may be used as value to indicate that within the
> body of a JSON-LD document, a string value of a term coerced to @id or
> @vocab is to be interpreted as an IRI. The difference between @id and
> @vocab is how values are expanded to absolute IRIs. @vocab first tries to
> expand the value by interpreting it as term. If no matching term is found
> in the active context, it tries to expand it as compact IRI or absolute IRI
> if there's a colon in the value; otherwise, it will expand the value using
> the active context's vocabulary mapping, if present, or by interpreting it
> as relative IRI. Values coerced to @id in contrast are expanded as compact
> IRI or absolute IRI if a colon is present; otherwise, they are interpreted
> as relative IRI.***
>
> Assuming that the Range of oa:motivatedBy is meant to include terms
> defined in our context document, e.g.:
>
>     bookmarking: "oa:bookmarking"
>
> then we should use @vocab.  This allows the correct mapping of the
> following line in the json-ld instance:
>
>     "motivation": "bookmarking"
>
> If we leave type as @id in our context document, then we are limited to
> using only this form in the json-ld instance:
>
>     "motivation": "oa:bookmarking"
>
> Note, the latter form does work correctly even if we use @vocab -- which
> also means that other communities can still extend our oa:Motivation
> ontology in their own namespaces, but the former form without the namespace
> prefix on the term does not.
>
> Is there a downside to using @vocab that I am not recognizing?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Cole
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org]
> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 11:09 PM
> To: Tim Cole <t-cole3@illinois.edu>
> Cc: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>; W3C Public Annotation List <
> public-annotation@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: JSON-LD Context
>
> Tim,
>
> I am just the messenger… and my JSON-LD is a bit rusty. But my first
> reaction is that what is there, ie, the first line is correct. What it says
> (I think) is that the value (range) of 'motivation' is a URI reference in
> RDF jargon, and that the property itself is oa:motivatedBy…
>
> Ivan
>
> > On 07 Aug 2015, at 23:39 , Timothy Cole <t-cole3@illinois.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Rob, Ivan-
> >
> > Shouldn't this line in the context document:
> >    "motivation":   {"@type":"@id", "@id" : "oa:motivatedBy"},
> >
> > Be this instead:
> >    "motivation":   {"@type":"@vocab", "@id" : "oa:motivatedBy"},
> >
> > This seems to be needed in order for motivation values without the oa:
> prefix to be recognized as in the oa ontology.
> >
> > Regardless, agree with Randall that it is very helpful to have this up.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Tim Cole
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Randall Leeds [mailto:randall@bleeds.info]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 6:42 PM
> > To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>; Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
> > Cc: W3C Public Annotation List <public-annotation@w3.org>
> > Subject: Re: JSON-LD Context
> >
> > That looks wonderful.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:12 PM Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> >> There were some minor syntax problems that I took care of (and pushed
> >> on the repo); the files are now also available as
> >>
> >> http://www.w3.org/ns/anno.jsonld
> >>
> >> Ivan
> >>
> >> > On 06 Aug 2015, at 24:54 , Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > A draft context, that we can put up on w3.org with Ivan's help:
> >> >
> >> >     http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/jsonld/anno.jsonld
> >> >
> >> > Please cast an eye over it and see if there's any bugs :)
> >> >
> >> > As we haven't decided yet on the property names for the
> relationships, I've left them alone. I did add the classes, with some
> hopefully friendly names, per issues.  Also xsd, xsi, iana, and ldp from
> Protocol and even further issues.
> >> >
> >> > Rob
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Rob Sanderson
> >> > Information Standards Advocate
> >> > Digital Library Systems and Services Stanford, CA 94305
> >>
> >>
> >> ----
> >> Ivan Herman, W3C
> >> Digital Publishing Activity Lead
> >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> >> mobile: +31-641044153
> >> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
> >>
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Sunday, 9 August 2015 14:15:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:39 UTC