Open skynx opened 5 years ago
Thanks for your comment, which will remain open to be considered by a future revision. I agree it would be better to have this self-contained. The WG did not deliver an official JSON-LD context, although some work on this was actually done in the group and the result can be found at https://github.com/w3c/shacl/blob/master/shacl-jsonld-context/shacl.context.ld.json and https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/tree/gh-pages/shacl-jsonld-context. Users can access that using
https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl-jsonld-context/shacl.context.ld.json
(Without checking details I think if we embed the context into the example then we'd also need to declare that ignoredProperties is @list, not just the namespace prefixes).
Section 1.4, "SHACL Example" articulates the following caveat when introducing the JSON-LD variant of an example.
I think the choice to leave out the
@context
part of the JSON description (which ungrounds the small number of namespace prefixes) and to explain this in preceding ancillary text is confusing. Rather than rely on the reader to bring in background knowledge at such an early point in the text, it could be more effective to alter the example to include the assumed namespace prefixes in@context
. If desired, the meaning of@context
could then be illustrated by also showing the URI-expanded JSON-LD representation (i.e. what you need without providing prefixes in@context
) of the same example shapes graph.This is an editorial/stylistic issue.