- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 23:22:35 +0100
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.com>, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>, W3C Semantic Web IG <semantic-web@w3.org>, W3C RDFa Community <public-rdfa@w3.org>
I am getting too old... :-) ivan --- Ivan Herman Tel:+31 641044153 http://www.ivan-herman.net (Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...) On 7 Jan 2017, at 20:39, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: >> On 7 Jan 2017, at 08:07, Gregg Kellogg <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.com> wrote: >> On Jan 6, 2017, at 10:18 PM, Ivan Herman <mailto:ivan@w3.org> wrote: >> >> My apologies, you are right. I mixed up with the csvw context. >> >> That being said, I wonder whether it would be a good idea to provide a general >> json-ld context with those prefixes, to be kept on /ns. We may want to see >> that with the JSON-LD community; it is not a big deal to have it and it may >> come handy. >> >> http://Prefix.cc maintains a JSON-LD context with a number of prefixes [1]. >> W3C could certainly host another, which would just be a subset of the CSVW >> context. >> >> I suspect we could automatically create such a context from the namespaces in >> http://www.w3.org/ns. >> >> >> Yes, but I wouldn't do that; being in ns doesn't mean it is stable. What I >> would propose to do is to have a strict copy of the rdfa default context >> entries in json ld (which is indeed a subset of tge one in csvw). > > > I already created such a context quite a while ago. It's available at http://www.w3.org/2013/json-ld-context/rdfa11... as described on http://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1 :-) > > > Cheers, > Markus > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > > >
Received on Saturday, 7 January 2017 22:22:52 UTC