- 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