- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 11:23:44 +0200
- To: "mfhepp@gmail.com" <mfhepp@gmail.com>
- Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJagrtzy1_0HkgjUR9o9c9=c80qNyHtwXHm3ORk7258SQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 9 June 2015 at 10:59, mfhepp@gmail.com <mfhepp@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Gregg, > dear Manu: > > I think there is a need for clarifying the proper use of multiple values > for the same property in JSON-LD because if I understand it properly, the > behavior differs from any other RDF syntax and Microdata (see [1]), as you > CANNOT simply repeat a property with different values, as in any other RDF > syntax, like so > I thought all RDF can be converted to JSON LD? JSON-LD is *capable of serializing any RDF graph or dataset* and most, but not all, JSON-LD documents can be directly interpreted as RDF as described in RDF 1.1 Concepts [RDF11-CONCEPTS <http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#bib-RDF11-CONCEPTS>]. http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#relationship-to-rdf > > > <script type="application/ld+json"> > { > "@context": "http://schema.org", > "@type": "Offer", > "businessFunction" : "http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Repair", > "businessFunction" : "http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Sell" > > } > </script> > > but instead must use a LIST of values, like so: > > > <script type="application/ld+json"> > { > "@context": "http://schema.org", > "@type": "Offer", > "businessFunction": ["http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Repair", " > http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Sell" ] > > } > </script> > > The Google Structured Data Testing Tool shows only the value for the last > use of the same property name, but in complex data structures, this will be > easy to overlook. > > We should highlight this prominently (and review all of our examples in > schema.org), because otherwise people will have a hard time understanding > why only part of their data is understood. > > In particular, product feature markup with many usages of > "additionalProperty" will be prone to this. > > Best > > Martin > > [1] > http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/81080/using-productontology-org-to-add-multiple-types/81081#81081 > > > ----------------------------------- > martin hepp http://www.heppnetz.de > mhepp@computer.org @mfhepp > > > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 9 June 2015 09:24:13 UTC