- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 12:37:58 +0200
- To: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Friday, October 04, 2013 12:15 PM, Simon Grant wrote: > Following up this thread for values of @type in @context... > > Would I be right in thinking that within the @context one cannot > have @type as an array? I can see problems in type coercion if > multiple types were allowed in the @context. You are right. > If I am right, might it be a good idea to add a note in section 5.4 > to the effect that an array cannot be used within the context? Section 5.4 would be the wrong place to do so because it doesn't talk about type coercion it would belong into section 6.5. I think that section is already clear enough: Type coercion is specified within an expanded term definition using the @type key. The value of this key expands to an IRI Furthermore, the grammar in section 8.7 says If the expanded term definition contains the @type keyword, its value MUST be an absolute IRI, a compact IRI, a term, null, or the one of the keywords @id or @vocab. Does this address your concerns? -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Friday, 4 October 2013 10:38:30 UTC