Re: Embedding a plain JSON node in a JSON-LD document

After reading more of the specs I believe our way to go is to use
@container/@index that allows keeping in a compacted form unmapped
properties with primitive values. If values are objects, then we will have
to define local context for them.

Cheers
Vagif


On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Vagif Abilov <vagif.abilov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Gregg,
>
> You are writing "ignored (or dropped)", and for us it makes a big
> difference whether unmapped data are ignored or dropped. Obviously we don't
> want parts of information to be dropped from the JSON response (returned as
> JSON-LD). Are there any rules for when unmapped data are simply ignored and
> when they are dropped?
>
> Best regards
> Vagif
>
>
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>wrote:
>
>> On May 5, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Vagif Abilov <vagif.abilov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > We have a bit of a challenge with some of the resources that we are
>> exposing over the Web using REST services. We strive to return all
>> responses as JSON-LD documents, but the structure of some  document
>> sections is not determined upfront, which means we can't build JSON-LD
>> context for such documents. Currently we are returning them as plain JSON
>> documents, but we would like to do better than that. Consider the following
>> document:
>> >
>> > {
>> >   firstName: "John",
>> >   lastName: "Smith",
>> >   dateOfBirth: "1970/03/12",
>> >   additionalInfo: {
>> >     favouriteSoccerClub: "soccer"
>> >   }
>> > }
>> >
>> > In the document above "firstName", "lastName", "dateOfBirth" represent
>> information with defined context, so it can be returned in a JSON-LD
>> response. But "favouriteSoccerClub" is a part of a property bag with items
>> added ad-hoc, so they can't be semantically described. Is it possible to
>> expose such document as JSON-LD with "additionalInfo" embedded as some kind
>> of CLOB but in a JSON format, so "additionalInfo" would still be a valid
>> JSON node?
>>
>> Sure, if “additionalInfo” isn’t mapped to a URI, it and it’s contents
>> will simply be ignored (or dropped) when processed by a JSON-LD algorithm
>> such as “expand”, so it’s fine to include data that shouldn’t be
>> interpreted.
>>
>> Gregg
>>
>> > Thanks in advance
>> >
>> > Vagif
>>
>>
>