- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 17:47:00 +0200
- To: "'Linked JSON'" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Tuesday, September 03, 2013 5:13 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote: >>> [[[ > >>> If the documentLoader option is specified, a conformant JSON-LD > > Processor > >>> MUST use it to dereference remote documents and contexts. The > > documentUrl in > >>> the returned RemoteDocument is used as base IRI and the contextUrl > is > > used > >>> instead of looking at the HTTP Link Header directly. For the sake > of > >>> simplicity, none of the algorithms in this document mention this > > directly. > >>> JSON-LD Implementations are not required to implement the > documentLoader > >>> option. > >>> ]]] > >> > >> Using the contextUrl instead of the link header doesn't address the > >> interaction of the contextUrl with the expandContext option. Either the > >> option overrides the link header or contextUrl, or they are both used, > >> in some order. > > > > Why not? The expandContext option is handled in step 4, nothing needs to be > > changed there. In step 5, instead of looking at the HTTP Link header > > directly, the contextUrl is used (as the processor doesn't have access to > > the HTTP response anyway). So they are both used, the first expandContext > > then contextUrl. Do you think that needs further clarification? > > You're right, this does make it clear. OK, I've added the text to the spec: https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/commit/e642063dc06214a78206b0fa1dea04 6dada4a468 [...] > We agreed to add a useDocumentLoader option and have an implementation > provide a document loader to use if this option is specified. This > allows us to test the normative requirements defined for the > documentLoader; the test ensures that an implementation properly > handles the results or exception based on a documentLoader behaving as > described. Right, but JSON-LD implementations are not required to implement the documentLoader option - only JSON-LD processors (implementations that also implement the specified API). Thus I proposed to simplify it by moving it directly into idltest. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2013 15:47:32 UTC