- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 10:54:36 +0000
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, Sam Goto <goto@google.com>
- Cc: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 28 November 2013 10:45, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: > Hi, > > I've just realized that all (?) JSON-LD examples in schema.org are invalid > since they include comments. Just as JSON, JSON-LD doesn't support comments. > > Example 1 of http://schema.org/Action for instance begins as follows: > > <script type="application/ld+json"> > // John listened to Pink with Steve at Anna's appartment on his iPod. > { > "@context": "http://schema.org", > "@type": "ListenAction", > ... > > The second line turns this into invalid JSON(-LD). It should thus be > rewritten to > > <script type="application/ld+json"> > { > "@context": "http://schema.org", > "@type": "ListenAction", > ... > > > Would it be possible to remove those comments at the beginning of all > examples? I fear that otherwise a lot of people will adapt this style which > will lead to severe interoperability problems. Fair point, thanks. I took a look around at commenting options for JSON-LD recently, and it's pretty bleak. Some people are using repeated keys, others using predictably named alternate keys. For JSON-LD I'm not aware of an idiom that doesn't give rise to unwanted triples, but perhaps there's some hack possible? This does make me wonder about the W3C spec for embedding JSON-LD in HTML, http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-json-ld-20131105/#embedding-json-ld-in-html-documents ... whether it would be wrong, bad and ugly to use HTML's inline comment syntax, i.e. <!-- ... -->. For the schema.org docs, we should probably just move the comments out of the <script>. cheers, Dan
Received on Thursday, 28 November 2013 10:55:03 UTC