W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > December 2013

RE: RDF 1.1 Primer

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 19:26:02 +0100
To: "'Yves Raimond'" <yves.raimond@bbc.co.uk>, "'Pierre-Antoine Champin'" <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Cc: "'Guus Schreiber'" <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>, "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <02ed01cef11e$4adb4500$e091cf00$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 6:21 PM, Yves Raimond wrote:
> > It should be noted that the @context would usually be provided as an
> > IRI, or even hidden in the HTTP headers, leaving only the "nice" JSON
> > to be seen.
> >
[...]
> It's now in mercurial - and an additional one with a remote context,
> which makes the JSON pretty nice to look at.

There's a typo in example 11, line 2. It has to be @context (the "@" is missing).

I think it would be much more inviting if you would use example 11 as first example in section C.2 JSON-LD, then show the context and mention that it can also be embedded directly in the document and that prefixes can be used the same way as in Turtle and use the multiple-graphs example to illustrate it. I've cleaned up the examples and the context and attached all of them in a single file.


> One quick question - any
> reason for mapping uri to @id instead of just reusing @id?

As Pierre-Antoine already said it has advantages when working with the data but I nevertheless think we probably should stick to @id and @type in the primer as these are really advanced features.


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 18:26:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:36 UTC