W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > March 2012

query about JSON-LD

From: Mark MacGillivray <mark.macgillivray@okfn.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 17:22:57 +0000
Message-ID: <CAJ9UX47syxq0Q9r5SddpHqTqV9RHYPCjR7LD265Saf+5E6kHfg@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-linked-json@w3.org
Hello to the JSON-LD list,

First - if this is the incorrect place for such a request - apologies,
and please direct me to a more suitable source of information.

I am Mark MacGillivray, and I am currently working on the JISC funded
Open Biblio 2 project with the Open Knowledge Foundation. On that
project, we are attempting to use JSON to represent simple
bibliographic metadata so that we can quickly and easily index and
display collections for individuals and research groups. We have a
loose convention around the JSON structures we are using, which we are
calling BibJSON. There are desires within the community to support
more complex structures, and to do validation; however, these go
beyond our main remit of simplicity.

Last year, during the earlier stages of this phase of our work, we
considered JSON-LD as a potential representation of RDF in JSON. It
stacked up pretty well, but at that point we decided to remain with
the simplicity option, and not concern ourselves with official support
of "real" linked data. However, it is not that we wish to shun the
power of linked data - we had a successful first project last year
around RDF/XML, so are totally happy with the concept - but just that
we must focus on the simplicity and accessibility for the individuals
/ small groups this year.

Hence, I have now suggested to our mailing list that we adopt JSON-LD
within BibJSON; the idea is that BibJSON remains simple, and anyone
who wants to do validation / namespaces could do so by following the
JSON-LD rules - e.g. identify a namespace, use it in their BibJSON,
then write whatever tests are required within that context to check
that BibJSON records they receive meet their needs.

In order to do this, I think all that is required is that we point
people at the JSON-LD website, and do some examples; so I have a
couple of questions:

1. the examples, I think, will just need to use the @context key
within a JSON object to point to the relevant namespace, then use the
relevant keys from that namespace. Am I right, or is there more?

2. Our records can come in a object under the "records" key, and that
object may also contain a "metadata" key (hence, the total object is a
collection). Is there a sensible way in JSON-LD to add the namespace
information only to the metadata object, to save copying it into every

3. If you are continuing to look for uptake of JSON-LD, and if I am
looking to recommend it to our community, would you be happy to answer
these questions and potentially a couple more as I try to come up with
some examples for people to follow?

More info about our project and BibJSON (and examples of it in use)
can be found at:


Thank you very much for any help and feedback you can provide,

Mark MacGillivray
on behalf of the JISC Open Biblio 2 project

Open Knowledge Foundation
Received on Friday, 2 March 2012 22:13:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:33 UTC