JSON Schema, Schema.org, JSON-LD: What’s the Difference?
1–5 of 5 posts
Re: JSON Schema, Schema.org, JSON-LD: What’s the Difference?
#2As a non-LD person, I've been very disappointed by the JSON-LD stuff when I tried to use it recently. I thought the point was to be able to "enrich" your API by adding a context and not changing your JSON responses, but in practice:
* There is no way to update your context without breaking your JSON-LD-aware consumers (one term in your JSON can't link to two IRIs, so you can have it expand to the new term or the old one, not both)
* There is no way to "expand" values to IRIs, the context only does it for keys, so if your JSON contains `{"personRole": "manager"}` you can 't expand it to `{"http://myschema.org/personRole": "http://myschema.org/manager"}`, you actually need that second IRI in your JSON
Really it's a great way to represent linked data, but there were plenty of options already. I wish it bridged the gap with JSON APIs instead of merely looking like JSON.
Re: JSON Schema, Schema.org, JSON-LD: What’s the Difference?
#3As a non-LD person, I've been very disappointed by the JSON-LD stuff when I tried to use it recently. I thought the point was to be able to "enrich" your API by adding a context and not changing your JSON responses, but in practice: * There is no way to update your context without breaking your JSON-LD-aware consumers (one term in your JSON can't link to two IRIs, so you can have it expand to the new term or the old…
With your first point, you are talking about versioning (switching to a new IRI while keeping the old one for compatibility)?
I agree that there probably is no value in using JSON-LD for an application that was built without LD in mind.
Regarding your last statement about APIs. JSON API (https://jsonapi.org/) looks interesting. Have you worked with that?
Re: JSON Schema, Schema.org, JSON-LD: What’s the Difference?
#4As a non-LD person, I've been very disappointed by the JSON-LD stuff when I tried to use it recently. I thought the point was to be able to "enrich" your API by adding a context and not changing your JSON responses, but in practice: * There is no way to update your context without breaking your JSON-LD-aware consumers (one term in your JSON can't link to two IRIs, so you can have it expand to the new term or the old…
With your first point, you are talking about versioning (switching to a new IRI while keeping the old one for compatibility)? I agree that there probably is no value in using JSON-LD for an application that was built without LD in mind. Regarding your last statement about APIs. JSON API ( https://jsonapi.org/ ) looks interesting. Have you worked with that?
What's frustrating is that mapping to multiple terms was almost included: https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/142
I didn't know about JSON:API, thanks for the pointer. It seems to tighten the JSON responses a bit, but doesn't address linking or extending vocabularies though.
Re: JSON Schema, Schema.org, JSON-LD: What’s the Difference?
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
With your first point, you are talking about versioning (switching to a new IRI while keeping the old one for compatibility)? I agree that there probably is no value in using JSON-LD for an application that was built without LD in mind. Regarding your last statement about APIs. JSON API ( https://jsonapi.org/ ) looks interesting. Have you worked with that?
What's frustrating is that mapping to multiple terms was almost included: https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/142 I didn't know about JSON:API, thanks for the pointer. It seems to tighten the JSON responses a bit, but doesn't address linking or extending vocabularies though.
Thanks for the link to the discussion on Github. I don't think it is a good idea to rely on inference (owl:sameAs) for something as basic as foaf:name vs. rdfs:label vs. schema:name, ...
I have not used JSON API yet but it is cool to see the "follow your nose" approach be applied to REST APIs.