Re: Some minor changes on the RDFa context document

OK.

Ivan

> On 10 Jan 2017, at 02:03, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>> wrote:
> 
>> On Jan 7, 2017, at 8:28 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> Ivan Herman
>> Tel:+31 641044153
>> http://www.ivan-herman.net <http://www.ivan-herman.net/>
>> 
>> (Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 7 Jan 2017, at 08:07, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.com <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.com>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jan 6, 2017, at 10:18 PM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <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.
>>> 
>>> Prefix.cc <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 www.w3.org/ns <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).
>> 
>> Can a context file refer to another one? Because then we could exchange the list of prefixes from the csvw context in favour of the separate one.
> 
> Yes, contexts can be recursive, but note that this involves multiple fetches, which is not optimal. I would recommend that each context be complete in itself.
> 
> Gregg
> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> 
>>>> Ivan
>>> 
>>> [1] https://prefix.cc/about/json-ld <https://prefix.cc/about/json-ld>
>>> 
>>>>> On 7 Jan 2017, at 00:46, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jan 5, 2017, at 6:51 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Two entries have been added to the list of "reserved" prefixes, ie, those that may be included into the official vocabulary prefixes. These are odrl and as.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> While these have no effect on current implementations and usage of RDFa and JSON-LD, be advised that, in the coming 1-2 months, three new prefixes may be added to the list:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Note that JSON-LD does not use pre-defined prefixes, so there’s no change necessary here. However, recall that CSVW does use the same prefixes as RDFa, so we’ll want to update the CSVW context accordingly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Gregg
>>>>> 
>>>>>> oa: Web Annotation vocabulary
>>>>>> as: Activity (Streams) vocabulary
>>>>>> dqv: Data Quality Vocabulary
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The first two are part of planned Recommendations; the third one is defined through an (already published) W3C Note. These changes may require a minor update on existing RDFa implementations.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1 <https://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ----
>>>>>> Ivan Herman, W3C
>>>>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
>>>>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>>>>> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ----
>>>> Ivan Herman, W3C
>>>> Digital Publishing Technical Lead
>>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
>>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>>> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>