Re: ODP: ODP: Re: Replace hydra:Error with application/problem+json

Yes, that’s fine. I just don’t see the need to explain to anyone that application/problem+json is based on JSON-LD if the spec is rewritten to be based on JSON-LD. In that case, it will be a given just due to its content type (and the RFC explaining the fact). So, yes, we can always bridge the gap between the current spec and JSON-LD, but is that necessary? Is anything lost if application/problem+json is rewritten so it is JSON-LD compatible out of the box?



-- 

Asbjørn Ulsberg          -=|=-         asbjorn@ulsberg.no

«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:43 PM, John Walker <john.walker@semaku.com>
wrote:

> Hi Asbjørn,
>  
>> On September 27, 2015 at 11:37 PM Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjornu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>  Why do we need both? Can’t application/problem+json be JSON-LD compatible
>> without announcing it in its Content-Type? Or is it expected that everything
>> that is JSON-LD compatible will use application/ld+json as its content type?
>> 
> You can just add a Link header to the response to reference to the context that
> can be used to interpret an ordinary JSON documents as JSON-LD.
> You can find more info abotu this in the JSON-LD rec:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#interpreting-json-as-json-ld
> Regards,
> John
>>  -- 
>>  Asbjørn Ulsberg          -=|=-         asbjorn@ulsberg.no
>> <mailto:asbjorn@ulsberg.no>
>>  «He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Karol Szczepański
>> <karol.szczepanski@gmail.com <mailto:karol.szczepanski@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> 
>>    > > 
>> >    OK, I see your point now.
>> > 
>> >    Server may take into account accepted media types client sent and choose
>> > between RDF (if applicable) or not. It still may ignore it and consider a
>> > response as a subject not for content negotation and come with bare
>> > ‘problem’ media type.
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    Regards
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    Karol Szczepański
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> > 
>> >    Od: Dietrich Schulten
>> >    Wysłano: niedziela, 27 września 2015 15:38
>> >    Do: public-hydra@w3.org
>> >    Temat: Re: ODP: Re: Replace hydra:Error with application/problem+json
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    Hi Karol,
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    that was a misunderstanding.
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    Am 27.09.2015 um 13:56 schrieb Karol Szczepański:
>> > 
>> >    > Hi
>> > 
>> >    >
>> > 
>> >    > Your approach would put non-RDF clients to problem as you suggest to
>> > 
>> >    > respond with application/ld+json instead of application/problem+json.
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    That was not my intention at all.
>> > 
>> >    The idea is: *If* a client says in its POST that it accepts
>> > 
>> >    application/ld+json, then the service might respond with
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    Content-Type: application/ld+json
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    If another client comes to the same service and accepts
>> > 
>> >    application/json, then the server might respond with
>> > 
>> >    application/problem+json, similarly for XML.
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    The rules of conneg apply, of course. The server may respond whatever it
>> > 
>> >    wants to.
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >    Best,
>> > 
>> >    Dietrich
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >     
>> > 
>> >  >