- From: Colin Maudry <colin@maudry.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 15:00:00 +0200
- To: public-linked-json@w3.org
Hello, I first [pinged][1] Markus and Manu on Twitter, but my question will make more sense with more than 140 characters. I am a consultant for the French Open Data Task Force, Etalab, and we are doing pre-study to improve how public contracting data is published. Looking for existing models, the [Open Contracting Data Schema][2] caught our attention for its completeness. Currently, this model is documented with a [JSON Schema][3] that describes what a complying JSON object looks like (datatype, valid values, global structure). The purpose of a JSON Schema is similar to the purpose of XML Schemas (XSD): specifying and validating the structure and content of a JSON object. In order to anchor contracting data in the Web and promote Linked Data, I would like to test our data with JSON that would comply with this schema, and add a @context that would turn properties and objects into Web resources identified with URIs to have an RDF version of the data. This JSON Schema contains a lot of information that would be added in this @context: - labels - comments - data types - properties-object relationships This schema is quite big (988 lines), and writing manually a context that would include all this information would be time consuming. Furthermore, as we are dealing with two standards, I would expect my use case not to be unique (is it?). I consequently think it would make sense to develop a tool that would, from a JSON Schema, produce the foundations of a JSON-LD context, so that all this redundant information is not retyped manually. Then, some things like @base, @valueUrl, etc. would be added (manually or not) for the context to do its job. I started a repo [here][4], meaning I volunteer (favouring NodeJS), but first, I'd like to be sure I'm not doing something stupid :-) In parallel, I'm also thinking of making an RDFS ontology out of this schema, to complete the "Linked Open Contracting Data" picture (see discussion [here][5]). So... do you think this use case is isolated and that developing such tool would be a waste of time? Thanks for your attention, Colin Maudry @CMaudry [1]: https://twitter.com/CMaudry/status/727505821291151360 [2]: http://standard.open-contracting.org/latest/en/schema/ [3]: http://standard.open-contracting.org/latest/en/schema/release/ [4]: https://github.com/ColinMaudry/schema2ld [5]: https://github.com/open-contracting/standard/issues/190
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2016 13:02:46 UTC