Re: where to put json-ld context for LDP

On Jul 30, 2014, at 12:24 PM, john.walker <john.walker@semaku.com> wrote:

> Hi Gregg,
>  
>  
>> On July 29, 2014 at 5:20 PM Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote: 
>> 
>> 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.
> Sorry to be a pedant, but I copied the above text (added quotes to delineate) from §6.7 of the JSON-LD spec [1].
> 
Yes, terms are overridden by merging the contexts; I must have missed that "terms" when scanning the sentence.
> If I understood correctly then it would be correct to combine both these statements: Contexts are merged where any duplicate context terms are overridden using a most-recently-defined-wins mechanism
> 
Correct.

Gregg
> I already had some interchange with Markus Lanthaler about how this would work in another thread [2].
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#advanced-context-usage
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra/2014Jul/0171.html
> 
>>> 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
>>> 
> 
>  John