Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Linking to a JSON-LD schema? #442

Open
trwnh opened this issue Sep 24, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Linking to a JSON-LD schema? #442

trwnh opened this issue Sep 24, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@trwnh
Copy link

trwnh commented Sep 24, 2024

Based on my understanding, "context is not a schema" -- @context serves to map terms to IRIs via term definitions, not to describe the actual data.

To address this, I've considered the following:

  • Serve a remote context document at one location, and serve a remote schema document at another location. Declare the remote context document as the @context. Manually import the schema document.
  • Serve the two in the same document. My understanding is that @context processing will only work with the @context entry of the resolved document ( as described in step 5.2.4 of the algorithm https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11-api/#algorithm ), so it is okay to put additional entries into the document, but it is not okay to put additional entries if the context was locally embedded instead. (Which is to say: a term definition having @id is a completely separate mechanism from what that @id represents, right?)

In the latter case (assuming I am correct that it is valid), there is a need to express that the document resolved not only contains a @context key to be used in context processing, but that it also contains a graph of statements representing RDF Schema, OWL, and other such metadata. For this, I wonder if it makes sense to declare a new keyword @schema, to be similarly applied until overridden by a more recent definition.

It's also possible I'm confused about all this, and there's a more idiomatic way to accomplish this. In either case, I'd appreciate feedback about this idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Discuss-Call
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant