RE: Naive (short) question about JSON-LD parsing

RE: https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/#media-type


As Orie pointed out, “application/activity+json” follows this same pattern.

From: Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2023 12:33 PM
To: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>; Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
Cc: public-credentials (public-credentials@w3.org) <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Naive (short) question about JSON-LD parsing


Thank you Orie, Daniel, Dave, and Manu for your quick responses – and that everyone had the same answer 😊



RE: - https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/ld+json


RE: Type name: application

RE: Subtype name: ld+json



Using the above as a pattern, isn’t the most obvious Media Type for a JSON-LD Verifiable Credential (encoded as JSON) something like:



RE: Type name: application

RE: Subtype name: ld-credential+json



That is, the Subtype name correlates with a particular object model (e.g. JSON-LD VC DM) with the suffix correlating with the parseable “file type” (e.g, +json).



Michael

CAD 2 cents – even though we don’t have pennies any more


Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com<mailto:dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>>
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2023 12:08:37 PM
To: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries<mailto:orie@transmute.industries>>
Cc: Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net<mailto:mwherman@parallelspace.net>>; public-credentials (public-credentials@w3.org<mailto:public-credentials@w3.org>) <public-credentials@w3.org<mailto:public-credentials@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Naive (short) question about JSON-LD parsing

Short answer: Yes, all JSON-LD is JSON and thus parsable by any "plain old" JSON parser.

Also (inline below)...

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 12:10 PM Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries<mailto:orie@transmute.industries>> wrote:
See also:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-w3cdidwg-media-types-with-multiple-suffixes#section-2.1


^ Note the draft for multiple suffixes appears not adopted by an IETF WG and is also expired... Happy to assist in correcting that.

That's not the most up to date draft, which I believe is here: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mediaman-suffixes-03.html


--

Dave Longley

CTO

Digital Bazaar, Inc.