how does a term definition include all of : type, id, and alias

good evening;

a term definition in a context can concern (at least) three things:
- the uri respective the key
- the type of the respective member values
- the processing keyword for which the term is aliased.

the definition of an extended term definition does not appears to provide a means to specify all combinations.
that is, it appears as if a context can specify either that a term is an alias, or that it has a definition (possibly extended), but not both.

is there a means to combine the two aspects? or does the lack of a means to express both an alias and an identifier in the extended definition mean one resorts to encoding the identifier in the key? as e.g..

{
   "@context": {
     "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type": "@type"
   }
}

i find in the mailing list archive some indications, that one should be able to declare, for example,

{
  "@context": {
    "myIdAlias": {"@id": "@id"},
    "myTypeAlias": {"@id": "@type"},
    "myValueAlias": "@value"
  },
  "myIdAlias": "http://example.com/id",
  "myTypeAlias": "http://example.com/Type",
  "http://example.com/foo": {"myValueAlias": "bar"}
}

but i found no description of the of the facility in the recommendation.
that is, i did not understand either the discussion of aliasing (http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#aliasing-keywords), or the various passages on (extended) term definitions - for example the description of their valid constituents (http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#context-definitions), to indicate how to interpret such a combination.

i note, also, that as the expression conflates either the processing role and the universal identifier, or the member term and the universal identifier, it lacks the degrees of freedom required to specify all combinations.

is there yet another alternative?

best regards from berlin,
---
james anderson | james@dydra.com | http://dydra.com

Received on Saturday, 19 July 2014 19:57:21 UTC