W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > October 2017

Re: Interpreting JSON as JSON-LD / Content-Type header spec. requirements

From: Jakob Voß <Jakob.Voss@gbv.de>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 09:09:44 +0200
To: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1ecb61a2-313f-fb83-3654-ed5ac422cbb7@gbv.de>
Gregg Kellogg wrote:

>> Also could some ​one
>> please explain why application/ld+json is forbidden to provide an 
>> #context relation with a Link Header?
> The rational is buried in the GitHub issue tracker, but as I recall, 
> application/ld+json is intended to represent a JSON-LD document that can 
> be fully interpreted based on its content, rather than rely on 
> out-of-band information. This allows the document to be used outside of 
> it’s HTTP context (URI base issues aside).

One point of JSON-LD is to allow applications making use of JSON-LD 
documents like normal JSON without having to care about RDF. These 
applications expect a JSON header such as "application/json" (yes, 
application/ld+json is a subset but don't expect applications to 
implement such content type semantics).

JSON-LD context should be provided both with field @context and in HTTP 
Link header via absolute URIs to make its detection as easy as possible. 
Not providing absolute URIs for context documents is lazy, ignorant, or 


Jakob Voß <jakob.voss@gbv.de>
Verbundzentrale des GBV (VZG) / Common Library Network
Platz der Goettinger Sieben 1, 37073 Göttingen, Germany
+49 (0)551 39-10242, http://www.gbv.de/
Received on Monday, 23 October 2017 07:10:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:50 UTC