- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 00:19:03 +0100
- To: <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Hi Tom,
As Stian says,
On Friday, January 30, 2015 11:10 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> Within a document you can have multiple @context at different levels
> and have different mappings for "id".
... but you can't scope term definitions to JSON property paths. This has been discusses (and keeps coming up). The reasoning to not support this in the first place was that it would make it much more difficult to understand how a document is interpreted.
> Now, "id" to a uuid sounds like it probably should be a URI and not a
> string.
That also came to my mind, but it might be tricky to map it to the right "scheme" - at least if you want to use urn:uuid:xxxxx because relative URNs don't exist.
On Friday, January 30, 2015 5:37 PM, Tom De Nies wrote:
> Right now all I can see as a solution is to force the developers to add
> the following to every object in their JSON:
> "@context" : { "id" : "@id" },
> Which would be quite a nuisance compared to just specifying 1 external
> context...
> Am I missing something?
No, not really. You either have to inject a context or, in this case probably easier, the @id property where it is needed (and leaving the id -> @id mapping out in the context out).
Cheers,
Markus
--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Friday, 30 January 2015 23:19:31 UTC