- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 17:08:20 -0500
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, public-linked-json@w3.org
BTW, what JSON-LD implementation would you suggest, for playing with
serializing from RDF to JSON-LD and framing? I see several JSON-LD
implementations listed here:
http://json-ld.org/test-suite/reports/
If I could run something as a command-line tool it would be easiest, but
if I need to invoke it from within a programming language that would be
okay too.
Thanks,
David
On 02/27/2015 04:09 PM, David Booth wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> On 02/27/2015 03:23 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>> On 26 Feb 2015 at 21:35, David Booth wrote:
>>> On 02/25/2015 10:11 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:
>>>> So, count us in - send the questions to the mailing list and it looks
>>>> like you have multiple community members that would be willing to
>>>> help out.
>>>
>>> Thanks Manu (and Markus and Jim and any others)! Okay, my first
>>> question regards blank nodes.
>>>
>>> Here is an except of a FHIR JSON data:
>>>
>>> {
>>> "dob": "1972-11-30",
>>> "_dob": {
>>> "id": "314159",
>>> "extension": [{
>>> "url" : "http://example.org/fhir/extensions#text",
>>> "valueString" : "Easter 1970"
>>> }]
>>> }
>>
>> Have you considered expanding dob and _dob to the same URL? Something
>> like:
>>
>> {
>> "@context": {
>> "@vocab": "http://example/fhir/vocab#",
>> "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
>> "dob": { "@type": "xsd:date" },
>> "_dob": { "@id": "dob", "@type": "@id" },
>> "extension": { "@container": "@list" }
>> },
>> "dob": "1972-11-30",
>> "_dob": {
>> "id": "314159",
>> "extension": [
>> {
>> "url": "http://example.org/fhir/extensions#text",
>> "valueString": "Easter 1970"
>> }
>> ]
>> }
>> }
>>
>> This yields (please note extension is a list):
>>
>> _:b0 <http://example/fhir/vocab#dob>
>> "1972-11-30"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#date> .
>> _:b0 <http://example/fhir/vocab#dob> _:b1 .
>> _:b1 <http://example/fhir/vocab#extension> _:b3 .
>> _:b3 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#first> _:b2 .
>> _:b3 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#rest>
>> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#nil> .
>> _:b1 <http://example/fhir/vocab#id> "314159" .
>> _:b2 <http://example/fhir/vocab#url>
>> "http://example.org/fhir/extensions#text" .
>> _:b2 <http://example/fhir/vocab#valueString> "Easter 1970" .
>
> Interesting. No, I had not considered that idea. It looks like it has
> the advantage of making JSON properties "dob" and "_dob" (the
> extensions) more explicitly connected to each other, because their
> values are now attached to the same RDF property
> <http://example/fhir/vocab#dob>. But it also has the disadvantage of
> overloading the <http://example/fhir/vocab#dob> property in RDF so that
> its range includes both xsd:date and rdf:List , which would complicate
> RDF inference.
>
> I had been thinking that the lack of explicit relationship between "dob"
> and "_dob" properties could be a problem for RDF, but I am now convinced
> that it will not be a problem. FHIR uses a closed content model, so
> extensions cannot introduce new properties. This means that all of the
> FHIR properties can be declared in a standard FHIR ontology, including
> the relationship between "dob" and "_dob", like this:
>
> fhir:_dob fhir:extends fhir:dob .
>
>>
>> You can transform these triples back to
>>
>> {
>> "@context": ...
>> "@graph": [
>> {
>> "@id": "_:b0",
>> "dob": "1972-11-30"m
>> "_dob": {
>> "@id": "_:b1",
>> "id": "314159",
>> "extension": [
>> {
>> "@id": "_:b2",
>> "url":
>> "http://example.org/fhir/extensions#text",
>> "valueString": "Easter 1970"
>> }
>> ],
>> }
>> }
>> ]
>> }
>>
>> with the following frame:
>>
>> {
>> "@context": {
>> "@vocab": "http://example/fhir/vocab#",
>> "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
>> "dob": { "@type": "xsd:date" },
>> "_dob": { "@id": "dob", "@type": "@id" },
>> "extension": { "@container": "@list" }
>> },
>> "dob": {}
>> }
>
> Wow, interesting technique! I didn't realize that the @context could
> un-overload a property like that, when serializing back to JSON-LD. In
> general I haven't yet thought much about how to do the serialization
> back to JSON-LD from RDF, except to observe that it looks it will
> require a FHIR-specific JSON-LD serializer. So it's good to know that a
> technique like that is possible.
>
> Thanks,
> David Booth
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 27 February 2015 22:08:48 UTC