- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:50:24 +0200
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
On Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:27 PM, Dietrich Schulten wrote: > Ah, it didn't occur to me that the last term definition wins. Probably > that technique is preferable over hydra:xxx. Maybe the examples in the In most cases yes. > spec could show how to do it. Could this be a reason to avoid I'm a bit on the fence about this because it is not about Hydra but about JSON-LD. > schema.org property names if they are likely to force everybody to > work around namespace collision right from the start? Description is No, I don't see this as a reason to avoid schema.org property names. > probably very common in other vocabs, commentDescription or so might > be better? Or we prefix everything with hydra in the first place? Creating contexts is very cheap.. especially for small vocabularies such as Hydra. We could, e.g., create a context which prefixes everything with an "h" (or any other character).. so "description" would become "hDescription". > ---- Markus Lanthaler schrieb ---- > > Hi Dietrich , > > On 24 Aug 2014 at 08:58, Dietrich Schulten wrote: > > I want to mix Hydra with schema.org. I found that there is potential > > for collisions and I am unsure how to solve them. > > > > { > > "@context": [ > > "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/context.jsonld", > > { > > "@vocab" : "http://schema.org/" > > You can add an explicit mapping for description here: > > "description": "http://schema.org/description" > > > } > > ], > > "@type": "Movie", > > "description": "Jack Sparrow and Barbossa embark on a quest", > > "name": "Pirates of the Carribean", > > "operation": [ > > { > > "@type": "DeleteResourceOperation", > > "method": "DELETE" > > } > > ] > > } > > [...] > > > IOW, hydra has hijacked the description attribute. > > > > Would the solution be not to define > > "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/context.jsonld" in the context, but only a > > term hydra and apply hydra: to every single hydra term? > > That would be an alternative solution, yeah. The downside is that you end up > having all those colons in your terms that make it more difficult to work > with the data (e.g. JavaScript's dot notation breaks can't be used anymore). > > > > If so, is it possible to point to hydra's external context file when > > mixing with schema.org? > > If you use the hydra prefix, there's no need to point to Hydra's context. > You could also define a context which defines Hydra's terms in another form > to reduce the likelihood of collisions.. something like hydraDescription or > even _description. > > > > HTH, > Markus > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler
Received on Thursday, 4 September 2014 10:50:48 UTC