RE: Defining property labels in external context document

On Thursday, July 18, 2013 12:00 PM, Adrian Pohl wrote:
> users. See the first version of the context document at [2]. I asked on
> twitter whether defining property labels in a context document is ok
> and Markus responded that this would be invalid, see [3]. He suggested
> putting the labels into the body of the external context file.

That just works if you are defining a vocabulary yourself. Otherwise you
have to add that data in body of the instance document instead of the remote

> Here is my question:
> How should I define labels of properties in the body of a context
> document? Just moving the text from context part to body as in [4] is
> obviously wrong as the properties are then used as properties and not
> as the things being talked about.

You would do it as with every other node:

   "@context": "remoteContext.jsonld",
   "@graph": [
       "@id": "",
       "label": [
             "@value": "Titelzusatz",
             "@language": "de"
             "@value": "other title information",
             "@language": "en"

> Following from this question I am asking you to do some modifications
> on paragraph 5.1 "The Context" of the JSON-LD 1.0 spec [5]:
> - Please make it clearer what information is valid inside the @context
> key and what is invalid.

Have you had a look at the grammar, specifically section B.7:

Simply speaking, you shouldn't put any other data in a term definition. If
you do so, it will be ignored by off-the-shelf JSON-LD processors.

> - In the sentence "They also allow terms to be used for index maps and
> to specify whether array values are to be interpreted as sets or
> lists." the reference of "They" is unclear. It probably shall refer to
> "expanded term definitions" which but this isn't clear at all as the
> sentence before names "values" and "IRIs" which would rather be
> considered to be referents of "They" in the following sentence.

Good catch. Fixed:

> - Some sentences later it says: "External JSON-LD context documents may
> contain extra information located outside of the @context key, such as
> documentation about the terms declared in the document. " It would be
> really helpful if you provided an example of an external context
> document that contains extra information outside the @context key. It
> may be clear to me that [4] is wrong but it is not clear to me how I
> should do this instead...

The problem is that it looks exactly like a normal document with an embedded
context. The difference only becomes apparent if the context is hosted at
the same URL as the vocab. Here's an example how I use it.

If you dereference (and follow the redirect) you
will get that document.

> P.S.: Should I also send this to

Feel free to but I don't think it's necessary.

Markus Lanthaler

Received on Thursday, 18 July 2013 22:53:07 UTC