- From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 20:12:10 +0100
- To: Hendy Irawan <ceefour666@gmail.com>, public-linked-data-fragments@w3.org
On 11/12/2014 06:17 PM, Hendy Irawan wrote:
Hi Hendry,
To my understanding
> In the Hydra spec I see hydra being represented as:
>
> 1. "@context": {
> "hydra": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/core#",
namespace / prefix in *local* context so hydra:foo will extend to
http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/core#
>
> 2. "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/context.jsonld",
here we have *remote* context, processor may need to do HTTP request
with Content-Type application/ld+json to get it and then process document
>
> 3. "@id": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/core",
URI of hydra core vocabulary itself (!= jsonld context, since any other
RDF serialization can use it)
>
> Which one is correct? How does a JSON-LD client knows that (presumably?)
> all three URIs are the same thing?
so all of them meant something different, and one just need to choose
depending on what one tries to refer to
>
> If I write a pure Hydra document with a single @context, what should I use:
>
> 1. "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/core#",
NO! this one you can use as you wrote before
"@context": {
"hydra": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/core#",
...
>
> 2. "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/context.jsonld",
YES, you can also add local context to it if needed:
"@context": [
"http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/context.jsonld",
{
"schema": "http://schema.org/",
"as": "http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#",
...
}
]
>
> What's the difference? And which one is "easiest" for a (rather naive)
> client to consume, but still ability to distinguish properties from
> different namespaces? (Without being a "full" compliance to entire spec)
>
> Hendy
>
HTH
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2014 19:14:20 UTC