- 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