- From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:36:39 -0600
- To: public-linked-json@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CABevsUHGohk0s0XtqFAJrBTYetTfjWehRO1m0ZDnbjGV4gR5=w@mail.gmail.com>
Dear all, In two projects* I've run into a pattern which is perhaps a common issue that could benefit from being more broadly discussed. If there is an rdf:List resource that has identity of its own, perhaps with other statements about it, then it seems like rdf:first and rdf:rest need to be instantiated directly within the JSON rather simply as a JSON list. For example: <foo:mySequence> a sc:Sequence, rdf:List ; rdfs:label "Default Order of Resources" ; rdf:first <resource1> ; rdf:rest _:b1. ... Which gets turned into something like: { "@id":"foo:mySequence", "@type":["sc:Sequence","rdf:List"], "label": "Default Order of Resources", "first": "x:resource1", "rest": ["x:resource2", ...] } Which pushes some of the RDF model in the face of the JSON developer that would be nice to avoid. Thus the question is whether something like: { "@id":"foo:mySequence", "@new-list-keyword-here": ["x:resource1", "x:resource2", ...] } might be more convenient? Unless I've just missed something like this in the documentation? Many thanks, Rob Sanderson * http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/multiplicity.html#List and http://www.shared-canvas.org/datamodel/iiif-metadata.html#Sequence
Received on Monday, 29 April 2013 21:37:06 UTC