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

RE: Valid values for @type in @context

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 13:02:22 +0200
To: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01a001cec0f1$3456acf0$9d0406d0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Friday, October 04, 2013 12:48 PM, Simon Grant
> Thanks for your explanation, Markus. I agree that the spec is
> technically clear on the point, if you read it all. My point was
> just about helpfulness to someone who has not yet digested the
> whole text.

You are right we should do something about this.


> I write from the point of view of a fan of the idea
> of JSON-LD -- I would like to use it as one binding for InLOC [1].

Cool!


> To me (and possibly others) it would be helpful either
> (a) to put a note in section 5.4 in any case -- not talking about
> type coercion, but simply noting that @type arrays cannot be used
> within @context (you don't have to say why at that point), or

What about adding a statement saying that using @type in the context cannot be sued to specify the node's type but is used for type coercing values? I think that would also address the overloading issue.


> (b) to dis-overload (?) @type, so that within @context there is
> "@valuetype" or something, with @type reserved for nodes outside
> the context.

I don't like that because it introduces other problems (people have to remember one more keyword, need to know when to use which, etc.)


> But if people reckon I am in an insignificant minority of people
> who would be helped by this, fine...

No, you are definitely not. I just tried to understand what exactly caused the confusion. Thanks for reporting it btw. :-)


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Friday, 4 October 2013 11:02:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:39 UTC