search

w3c / json-ld-bp

JSON-LD 1.1 Best Practices Note
https://w3c.github.io/json-ld-bp/
Other
21 stars 7 forks source link

Add example on order impact on @protected #2

Closed rubensworks closed 4 years ago

rubensworks commented 5 years ago

Following the discussion in https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/153, it would be good to add an example to the BP document of non-trivial @protected usage that does not throw an error.

The following (error-throwing) example is present in the syntax spec:

{
  "@context": [
    {
      "@version": 1.1,
      "Person": "http://schema.org/Person",
      "knows": "http://schema.org/knows",
      "name": {
        "@id": "http://schema.org/name",
        "@protected": true
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "this_attempt_to_override_name_will_fail"
    }
  ]
}

The following would be relevant to add as an example that does not throw an error, even though there is a term override happening:

{
  "@context": [
    {
      "name": "this_attempt_to_override_name_will_fail"
    },
    {
      "@version": 1.1,
      "Person": "http://schema.org/Person",
      "knows": "http://schema.org/knows",
      "name": {
        "@id": "http://schema.org/name",
        "@protected": true
      }
    }
  ]
}
BigBlueHat commented 5 years ago

Isn't this just the normal inheritance/overriding pattern then? Also, if the first "name" actually does get overridden (in your second example) it's value should change. 😃

rubensworks commented 5 years ago

Isn't this just the normal inheritance/overriding pattern then?

Yes, you're right.

The only reason for adding this example would be to clarify that @protected can –next to creating a brand new protected term– also be used while redefining an (unprotected) term.

This was an open question for me after reading the section on @protected in the spec, so it's possible that other people may have the same question.

pchampin commented 5 years ago

so it's possible that other people may have the same question.

granted. But on the other hand, I'm concerned that too many examples would be counter productive, making the spec harder to read...

gkellogg commented 5 years ago

Usually, test cases serve to flesh out corner cases; although not visible in the spec, they do serve a good purpose for describing such behavior.

iherman commented 4 years ago

There may be one reason why this should be put into the BP document: the text does emphasize in §3.4 JSON array should assume that values in an array should be assumed as unordered. However, the value of @context is different: order of contexts does count, and this is a good (albeit possibly a bit complex) example.

ajs6f commented 4 years ago

It shouldn't be too hard to develop an isolated example showing two simple contexts interact that way. I think it's a very good idea to show it, and not just tell people about it in the spec.

ajs6f commented 4 years ago

Is the desire here to feature an example with two contexts (as per @rubensworks' example above) that do and don't successfully override a definition, based on the ordering question? Is @rubensworks' example (perhaps with a different vocabulary) meet for that purpose immediately?

iherman commented 4 years ago

This issue was discussed in a meeting.