Re: where to put json-ld context for LDP

On Jul 29, 2014, at 1:21 AM, "john.walker" <john.walker@semaku.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Gregg
>> On July 29, 2014 at 2:08 AM Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:
>>  
>> We could consider a boilerplate context, which would gather such common definitions together, then you could do something like the following:
>>  
>> {
>>   "@context": [
>>     " http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfs",
>>     {
>>       "@vocab": " http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#",
>>       "ldp":  " http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#",
>>       ...
>>     }
>>   }
>> }
>>  
>> And put all of the RDFS-related definitions in a single location.
> I understood duplicate context terms are overridden using a most-recently-defined-wins mechanism.
> 
Contexts are merged, not overridden.
> So if I was using the above LDP example as an external context and the referenced RDFS context was defined in a similar way.
> 
> Imagine there were some terms with 'the same' name, say rdfs:comment and ldp:comment. If I used the term "comment" in my JSON-LD document, I assume this would be expanded to "http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#comment" as this is the most recently defined.
> 
If you define @vocab, it can be used to expand something like 'comment' to, say 'ldp:comment'. You could also define a term 'comment', as an expanded term definition; the last one wins.

I would use 'rdfs:comment' in the vocabulary definition, for this very reason.
> Also if I wanted to use any RDFS term in my document, then i would HAVE to prefix them with rdfs: otherwise they would be expanded again the @vocab from LDP context.
> 
Yes, in general, I would avoid using non-prefix terms in the vocabulary definition, itself; average those for users of the LDP context.
> Do I understand that correctly?
> 
> Reminds me of XML namespaces...
> 
IMO, prefixes are much simpler than namespaces. In JSON-LD, you can use compact IRIs, terms, or even terms which look like compact IRIs.

Gregg
> Cheers
> 
> John