Re: W3C WG Update

By adding a context to the existing JSON document, transformations are 
strightforward.

For example, this is the RDF for example of use #1 
<http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/ODRL21>.

|@prefix odrl: <http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/> .

<http://example.com/policy:0099>
	a odrl:Set;
	odrl:permission [
		a odrl:Permission ;
		odrl:target <http://example.com/asset:9898> ;
		odrl:action odrl:reproduce
	] ;
	odrl:prohibition [
		a odrl:Prohibition ;
		odrl:target <http://example.com/asset:9898> ;
		odrl:action odrl:modify
	] .|


By using a converter tool (for example the one at 
http://www.easyrdf.org/converter), we obtain the JSON-LD equivalent....

|[
   {
     "@id": "_:b0",
     "@type": [
       "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/Permission"
     ],
     "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/target": [
       {
         "@id": "http://example.com/asset:9898"
       }
     ],
     "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/action": [
       {
         "@id": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/reproduce"
       }
     ]
   },
... OMITTED FOR CLARITY ...

|


Which is indeed different from the ODRL JSON serialization 
<https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/json/2.1/#section-Examples>.

|{
     "policytype": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/Set",
     "policyid": "http://example.com/policy:0099",
     "permissions": [{
         "target": "http://example.com/asset:9898",
         "action": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/reproduce"
     }],
     "prohibitions": [{
         "target": "http://example.com/asset:9898",
         "action": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/modify"
     }]
}.
|


However, this JSON can be transformed to JSON-LD by adding a context:

|{
   "@context": {
     "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
     "odrl": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/",
     "policytype": { "@id": "rdf:type",  "@type": "@id" },
     "permissions": { "@id": "odrl:permission",  "@type": "@id" },
      "target" : {"@id": "odrl:target",  "@type": "@id" },
      "action" : {"@id": "odrl:action",  "@type": "@id" }
    },
   "@graph": [
      {
         "@id": "http://example.com/policy:0099",
          "policytype": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/Set",
          "permissions": [{
               "target": "http://example.com/asset:9898",
               "action": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/reproduce"
           }]
       }
    ]
}|


And then we can then create RDF from the JSON form...

|@prefix odrl: <http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/> .

<http://example.com/policy:0099> a odrl:Set .
<http://example.com/policy:0099> odrl:permission _:perm0 .
_:perm0 odrl:action <http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/reproduce> .
_:perm0 odrl:target <http://example.com/asset:9898> .|


Very interesting, though...

Regards,
Víctor and Nandana


El 06/11/2015 a las 0:05, Renato Iannella escribió:
>
>> On 5 Nov 2015, at 2:54 AM, Myles, Stuart <SMyles@ap.org 
>> <mailto:SMyles@ap.org>> wrote:
>>
>> So, given this, and given that the at least some of the current 
>> implementations of ODRL 2.1 support JSON already, can we get the W3C 
>> to retain the existing format?
>
> Does it make sense to then have two encodings? (one for JSON, and one 
> for JSON-LD)
>
> Or...Can we automatically serialise the JSON-LD from the ODRL OWL 
> ontology?
>
> *Renato Iannella*
> /Head of Innovation and Emerging Technologies, /*KnowledgeFlux*
> Level 7, 100 Edward St, Brisbane 4000 AUSTRALIA +61 4 1313 2206
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel
D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
ETS de Ingenieros Informáticos
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Campus de Montegancedo s/n
Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain
Tel. (+34) 91336 3753
Skype: vroddon3