Re: Invalid "@context" in schema.org JSON-LD examples?

On 14 August 2013 19:37, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:

> Hi:
>
> I was comparing the JSON-LD examples in the likes of
> http://schema.org/Action and the "Looking inside tables" proposal with
> the latest JSON-LD spec at http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/, and
> I'm pretty sure the use of @context in the schema.org examples is
> incorrect.
>
> Per http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#default-vocabulary, one
> specifies the default vocabulary like so:
>
> "@context": {
>     "@vocab": "http://schema.org/"
>   }
>
> ... and then the JSON-LD properties and types are all expanded
> automatically to use http://schema.org/ as a prefix.
>
> However, the schema.org examples currently use:
>
>   "@context": "http://schema.org",
>
> and then use unprefixed types and properties.
>
> If http://schema.org returned a JSON-LD context document, per
> http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#the-context, then this might be
> workable - but it doesn't. Even if that URL did return a JSON-LD context
> document, I think the examples would be stronger anyway (and would help
> avoid leading JSON-LD adopters down an invalid path) if they used the
> only-slightly-longer "@context:" { "@vocab": "http://schema.org/" }
> approach.


The issue is that a proper context  ought to have a pile more stuff in it
(notes on which properties have string values vs thing values, in
particular); we wanted to minimise the impact on the actual JSON files.

The intent is for 'http://schema.org' to dereference (if you send the right
HTTP headers) to a big JSON-LD context file. There are some other technical
pieces of work that need doing first - both with schema.org server side
hosting/implementation for content negotiation, but also putting together
the correct context definitions and integrating them with the site
management code. But we'll get there...

Dan