- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:30:50 -0500
- To: "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Dec 10, 2012, at 09:46 , Markus Lanthaler wrote: > Hi Ivan, > > >> Markus made a change on the pyRdfa processor the other day (which I >> propagated to the pyRdfa service on the W3C) to change the media type >> when distilling json-ld from RDFa. I realized yesterday that this >> 'broke' a feature I used: I have a JSON viewer/displayer extension in >> Firefox that did not work any more. The reason is obvious: that >> extension works on a /json media type but does not on /jsonld+json >> (probably ignores any YYYY+json in general). > > Yes, I'm aware of that problem. The thing is that currently Firefox doesn't > provide an API to register extensions for MIME type ranges such as > application/*+json. If you are using JSONView I can send you a patched > version that works also with application/ld+json. > Actually, yes, that is the one, so a fixed version would indeed be welcome... > >> Hence my question: do we have an idea how widely the '+' mechanism is >> implemented among tools that rely on media type? My _hunch_ is that >> this is not widely done (this was/is an issue with the YYYY+xml stuff >> as well). > > I would say it is widely used but library support is still quite limited. > There's an ongoing effort to standardize the +json convention [1]. I do hope > that changes the situation to the better once it's out. > Ok. I did not know about [1]. This may answer my question. Thanks Ivan > >> Because the major value of JSON-LD is that existing JSON >> tools can happily work with it, possibly ignoring the 'LD' aspects, I >> wonder whether, in practice, it is not better not to introduce a new >> media type... Of course, if the experience is that YYYY+jsonld works in >> general, and only my extension has a bug then, well, o.k. >> >> I am just musing here, not raising some sort of an objection... > > That would just fix a specific symptom but not the underlying problem and > has some serious downsides. If we would do that, than there wouldn't be any > way to detect if the response was JSON-LD or not without content sniffing. > It would also make it impossible for clients to specifically request JSON-LD > in content negotiation. Furthermore it become a problem if JSON-LD specific > development tools became available. > > I have been working on something related [2] recently but haven't had time > yet to transform that into a browser plugin. It's definitely on my todo > list. > > Just go to [2] and click on the link at the bottom to load a JSON-LD > document. When you move your mouse over any property or value a tooltip > showing you the IRI it would expand to appears. The IRI is also dereferenced > in the background on the corresponding documentation is shown. This is still > an early prototype - so don't expect too much :-) > > > Let me know if you want the patched JSONView version in the meantime. > > > [1] > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs-08#sect > ion-3.1 > [2] https://m.lanthi.com/HydraConsole > > > Cheers, > Markus > > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 10 December 2012 15:31:19 UTC