Open jmvanel opened 3 years ago
"taxonKey" is an @id and it is numeric. It is associated with a @base. json
@id
@base
{ "gbifID":"1258202889", "protocol": "DWC_ARCHIVE", "basisOfRecord": "PRESERVED_SPECIMEN", "taxonKey": 7310533 }
jsonld @context
@context
{ "@context": { "@vocab" : "http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/", "@base" : "https://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/", "dwciri": "http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/iri/", "gbifID": "@id", "taxonKey":{ "@context": { "@base" : "https://api.gbif.org/v1/species/" }, "@id": "dwciri:toTaxon", "@type": "@id" } } }
Expected:
<https://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/1258202889> <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/iri/toTaxon> <https://api.gbif.org/v1/species/7310533> .
Current output
<https://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/1258202889> <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/iri/toTaxon> 7310533 .
If numeric @id's are legal, it should be mentioned the specification, no ? There is a problem with round tripping back to JSON here, but in my use case I only care about getting RDF triples.
"taxonKey" is an
@id
and it is numeric. It is associated with a@base
. jsonjsonld
@context
Expected:
Current output
If numeric
@id
's are legal, it should be mentioned the specification, no ? There is a problem with round tripping back to JSON here, but in my use case I only care about getting RDF triples.