Open filip26 opened 1 day ago
I think it’s akin to declaring prefixes which are unused, which is also a common practice. I don’t consider it a bug, although it might be nice to get some feedback that there a contexts which are unused, although this could be complicated due to the way in which contexts interact.
I'm not sure it's an alike case, unused prefixes and unused @context
. There is almost no work with unused prefixes, but you have to dereference and pre-process an unused @context
no matter if it's later applied or not.
+1 to get feedback
Hi, I've noticed real world examples of JSON-LD documents declaring an array of context URIs from which some of those contexts are not effectively applicable, the terms are not present in the compacted JSON-LD.
This is probably the result of blindly setting the
@context
URI array to all "variations" of a document.Extending the compaction algorithm of a new policy on how to proceed unused contexts (Warn|Drop|Keep)? could help with documents generated from RDF.
Does there exist consensus on unused
@context
declared as dereferenceable URIs? A bad practice or OK?