W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > July 2013

RE: RDF interpretation of JSON-LD with missing context

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 20:22:14 +0200
To: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-ID: <017c01ce7687$ea3d46f0$beb7d4d0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
Removing all cc's, discussing it on the list should be enough

On Monday, July 01, 2013 7:39 PM, David Booth wrote:
> context may be in a separate document that may not be accessible to a
> client that is attempting to interpret that JSON-LD as RDF
>
[...]
> 
> Gregg responded:
>  > This is already covered in the JSON-LD API context processing
>  > algorithm in step 3.2.3:
>  >
>  > [[[
>  > Dereference context. If context cannot be dereferenced,
>  > a loading remote context failed error has been detected and
>  > processing is aborted.
>  > ]]]
> 
> Do you really think that JSON-LD documents will be completely ignored
> just because the context is missing?   In some cases a user may be able
> to get the JSON-LD author to correct the JSON-LD document or make the
> context available, but in other cases the user will have no way to do
> that, and I would imagine that in many cases the user would still like
> to get as much benefit from the JSON-LD document as possible.  So to my
> mind telling them to abort seems like turning a blind eye to the
> problem.  But I am really unsure of what people are likely to do in the
> situation of a missing context -- assuming that they still want to try
> to use the JSON-LD document.  Anybody know?

The API provides a callback which can also be used to recover from such
errors. Hard coding it into the JSON-LD algorithms would be wrong IMO. The
algorithm doesn't know anything about the data and so all it can do is to
fail with the most descriptive error message possible.

Furthermore, it's also simple enough to provide an alternative context by
the API. So I think all the options you outlined are already available -
however, they need to be explicitly requested. I believe that's the right
way to address such problems.



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 1 July 2013 18:22:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:38 UTC