- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:46:18 -0400
- To: François Daoust <francois@joshfire.com>
- CC: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
There used to be something in there about this [1], but it seems to have been lost at some point. [[[ A value with an associated type, also known as a typed value, is indicated by associating a value with an IRI which indicates the value's type. Typed values may be expressed in JSON-LD in three ways: • By utilizing the @type keyword when defining a term within a @context section. • By utilizing the expanded form for specifying objects. • By using a native JSON type. ]]] Looks like it was done in this commit by Markus [2]. Markus, do you recall why this was removed? Gregg [1] http://json-ld.org/spec/ED/json-ld-syntax/20120522/#typed-values [2] https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/commit/9fc8cadfc6f05fbbf5d0c18216e688b5da53949e On Jul 17, 2012, at 7:51 AM, François Daoust wrote: > Hi, > > I was looking at the JSON-LD Syntax spec and realized that I could not > easily answer the question: "can I directly use a number as value in > JSON-LD?" looking at the spec. All the examples in the JSON-LD Syntax > spec use string values, including those in the "Type coercion" section > [1]: > > The only example I could find that uses a number as value is Example > 25 in the "Data Round Tripping" section of the JSON-LD API spec [2]: > { > "@context": { > "number": { > "@id": "http://example.com/vocab#number", > "@type": "xsd:nonNegativeInteger" > } > }, > "number" : 42 > } > > Could one of the examples in the syntax spec use values that are not > strings (namely number and boolean) to clarify that developers do no > need to convert such values into strings? > > Also, the spec borrows terms definitions from JSON, including number, > null, and true and false, but I do not see a definition for "value" > [3]. Do I miss something? Or is it already covered by one of the > remaining open issues (e.g. JSON-LD grammar or alignment with RDF > terms?) > > Thanks, > Francois. > > [1] http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-syntax/#type-coercion > [2] http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-api/#data-round-tripping > [3] http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-syntax/#how-to-read-this-document >
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2012 16:46:57 UTC