Re: Proposal: Structured Previews

Hi Thad,

Jumping into this thread…

I would also like to see a JSON-LD version of the Reconciliation API. I would be willing to assist with vocabs and the implementation of an actual reconciliation service responding with JSON-LD. 

Sounds like a good topic for the next monthly meeting. 

Regards,
Gregory

> On Oct 30, 2024, at 9:40 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks Albin,
> 
> I've commented in your PR on my preference for using JSON-LD to represent structured previews, instead of just JSON itself, as well as giving my rationale for that preference.  I'm also well connected to structured data on the web, and for years have been participating and tracking various standards now quite prevalent throughout GLAM and Science institutions sharing their Linked Data.  There's also alternative formats that the JSON-LD working group has been tracking and reviewing such as YAML-LD and others.
> 
> I still think that the Reconciliation API could be expressed under JSON-LD.  I don't see a reason why we would limit clients to not also use JSON-LD for reconciliation.  We would simply need to just publish a new Reconciliation Vocab context for publishers to use.  Consuming the recon results would be a choice of original "recon" or "json-ld" formats depending on client preferences or services preferences.
> 
> Drafting that new Reconciliation Vocab could be done by me, and others willing to lend a hand, and it wouldn't be that hard (days).  Then publishers would have an alternative query results standard and could add into their manifest that - "resultFormats": ["json-ld", "recon"] to tell consumers that query results could be returned alternatively as JSON-LD with the expectation that an "@context":"https://reconciliation-api.github.io/vocab/json-ld" is within the result.
> 
> Deep thoughts?
> 
> Thad
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/
> https://calendly.com/thadguidry/