W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > July 2011

Re: Reference versus xsd:anyURI Literal in JSON-LD

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 20:21:46 -0400
Message-ID: <4E1A421A.4010203@digitalbazaar.com>
To: public-linked-json@w3.org
On 07/10/2011 11:12 AM, Niklas Lindström wrote:
> a quick remark regarding the current use of "xsd:anyURI" in "coerce"
> directives in JSON-LD (both in the spec and the playground). That
> should really be "@iri", not "xsd:anyURI". The latter means the value
> is a *literal* (with datatype xsd:anyURI), and not a *reference*.

Good idea, if you look in Section 2.5 of the Basic spec:


I tried out "IRI", but as you say above, "@iri" makes more sense. It
also has the added benefit of not requiring the developer to specify the
"xsd" prefix if they just want to do @iri coercion. Anyone opposed to
this change - replace "xsd:anyURI" to "@iri" in @coerce?

Should we do the same for "@literal" - at the moment, we use xsd:string.
I think that the RDF Working Group just stated that "xsd:string" is the
same as a plain literal. We could do something inline with that decision:

      "@literal": ["foaf:name", "dc:title"]

This would effectively state that the context wants the output to be a
plain literal, regardless of whether or not language information or
datatype information is specified. I don't necessarily like this as it
could end up making data /less/ specific. The previous features which
add @iri coercion and @datatype coercion would work in the opposite
direction w/ @literal - removing any @iri, @language, and @datatype

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarm Developer Tools and Demo Released
Received on Monday, 11 July 2011 00:22:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:30 UTC