This document is also available in this non-normative format: diff to previous version .
This document is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License .
JSON [ RFC4627 ] has proven to be a highly useful object serialization and messaging format. In an attempt to harmonize the representation of Linked Data in JSON, this specification outlines a common JSON representation format for expressing directed graphs; mixing both Linked Data and non-Linked Data in a single document.
This document is merely a public working draft of a potential specification. It has no official standing of any kind and does not represent the support or consensus of any standards organisation.
This document is an experimental work in progress.
This section is non-normative.
JSON,
as
specified
in
[
RFC4627
],
is
a
simple
language
for
representing
data
on
the
Web.
Linked
Data
is
a
technique
for
creating
a
graph
of
interlinked
data
across
different
documents
or
Web
sites.
Data
entities
are
described
using
IRI
s,
which
are
typically
dereferencable
and
thus
may
be
used
to
find
more
information
about
an
entity,
creating
a
"Web
"Web
of
Knowledge".
Knowledge".
JSON-LD
is
intended
to
be
a
simple
publishing
method
for
expressing
not
only
Linked
Data
in
JSON,
but
also
for
adding
semantics
to
existing
JSON.
JSON-LD is designed as a lightweight syntax that can be used to express Linked Data . It is primarily intended to be a way to use Linked Data in Javascript and other Web-based programming environments. It is also useful when building interoperable Web services and when storing Linked Data in JSON-based document storage engines. It is practical and designed to be as simple as possible, utilizing the large number of JSON parsers and libraries available today.
The syntax does not necessarily require applications to change their JSON, but allows one to easily add meaning by simply adding or referencing a context. The syntax is designed to not disturb already deployed systems running on JSON, but provide a smooth upgrade path from JSON to JSON-LD with added semantics. Finally, the format is intended to be easy to parse, efficient to generate, and only requires a very small memory footprint in order to operate.
This document is a detailed specification for a serialization of Linked Data in JSON. The document is primarily intended for the following audiences:
This specification does not describe the programming interfaces for the JSON-LD Syntax. The specification that describes the programming interfaces for JSON-LD documents is the JSON-LD Application Programming Interface [ JSON-LD-API ].
To understand the basics in this specification you must first be familiar with JSON, which is detailed in [ RFC4627 ]. To understand the API and how it is intended to operate in a programming environment, it is useful to have working knowledge of the JavaScript programming language [ ECMA-262 ] and WebIDL [ WEBIDL ].
JSON [ RFC4627 ] defines several terms which are used throughout this document:
JSON-LD specifies a number of syntax tokens and keywords that are using in all algorithms described in this section:
@context
@context
keyword
is
described
in
detail
in
the
section
titled
The
Context
.
@id
@value
@language
@type
@container
@list
:
For the avoidance of doubt, all keys, keywords and values in JSON-LD are case-sensitive.
There are a number of ways that one may participate in the development of this specification:
This section is non-normative.
The following section outlines the design goals and rationale behind the JSON-LD markup language.
A number of design considerations were explored during the creation of this markup language:
@context
and
@id
)
to
use
the
basic
functionality
in
JSON-LD.
No
extra
processors
or
software
libraries
are
necessary
to
use
JSON-LD
in
its
most
basic
form.
The
language
attempts
to
ensure
that
developers
have
an
easy
learning
curve.
An Internationalized Resource Identifier ( IRI ), as described in [ RFC3987 ], is a mechanism for representing unique identifiers on the web. In Linked Data , an IRI is commonly used for expressing a subject , a property or an object .
JSON-LD defines a mechanism to map JSON terms, i.e., keys and values, to IRIs. This does not mean that JSON-LD requires every key or value to be an IRI , but rather ensures that keys and values can be mapped to IRIs if the developer desires to transform their data into Linked Data . There are a few techniques that can ensure that developers will generate good Linked Data for the Web. JSON-LD formalizes those techniques.
We will be using the following JSON markup as the example for the rest of this section:
{ "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny" }
In JSON-LD, a context is used to map term s, i.e., keys with associated values in an JSON document, to IRI s. A term is a short word that may be expanded to an IRI . A term must have the lexical form of NCName (see [ XML-NAMES ]), compact IRI , absolute IRI , or be an empty string.
The
Web
uses
IRIs
for
unambiguous
identification.
The
idea
is
that
these
term
s
mean
something
that
may
be
of
use
to
other
developers
and
that
it
is
useful
to
give
them
an
unambiguous
identifier.
That
is,
it
is
useful
for
term
s
to
expand
to
IRIs
so
that
developers
don't
accidentally
step
on
each
other's
vocabulary
terms.
For
example,
the
term
name
may
map
directly
to
the
IRI
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
.
This
allows
JSON-LD
documents
to
be
constructed
using
the
common
JSON
practice
of
simple
name/value
pairs
while
ensuring
that
the
data
is
useful
outside
of
the
page,
API
or
database
in
which
it
resides.
The
value
of
a
term
mapping
must
be
either;
1)
a
simple
string
with
the
lexical
form
of
an
absolute
IRI
or,
2)
an
JSON
object
containing
an
@id
,
@type
,
@language
,
or
keyword.
@list
@container
These Linked Data term s are typically collected in a context document that would look something like this:
{ "@context": { "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "depiction": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction", "@type": "@id" }, "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id" }, } }
This context document can then be used in an JSON-LD document by adding a single line. The JSON markup as shown in the previous section could be changed as follows to link to the context document:
{
"@context": "http://json-ld.org/contexts/person",
"name": "Manu Sporny",
"homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
"depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
}
The
additions
above
transform
the
previous
JSON
document
into
a
JSON
document
with
added
semantics
because
the
@context
specifies
how
the
name
,
homepage
,
and
depiction
terms
map
to
IRIs.
IRIs
.
Mapping
those
keys
to
IRIs
gives
the
data
global
context.
If
two
developers
use
the
same
IRI
to
describe
a
property,
they
are
more
than
likely
expressing
the
same
concept.
This
allows
both
developers
to
re-use
each
others
data
without
having
to
agree
to
how
their
data
will
interoperate
on
a
site-by-site
basis.
Contexts
may
also
contain
type
information
for
certain
term
s
as
well
as
other
processing
instructions
for
the
JSON-LD
processor.
Contexts may be specified in-line. This ensures that JSON-LD documents can be processed when a JSON-LD processor does not have access to the Web.
{
"@context":
{
"name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
"depiction":
{
"@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction",
"@type": "@id"
},
"homepage":
{
"@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
"@type": "@id"
},
},
"name": "Manu Sporny",
"homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
"depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
}
Contexts may be used at any time a JSON object is defined. A JSON object may specify multiple contexts, using an array , which is processed in array-order. This is useful when an author would like to use an existing context and add application-specific terms to the existing context. Duplicate context term s must be overridden using a last-defined-overrides mechanism.
The set of contexts defined within a specific JSON Object are referred to as local context s. The active context refers to the accumulation of local context s that are in scope at a specific point within the document. The following example specifies an external context and then layers a local context on top of the external context:
{ "@context": [ "http://json-ld.org/contexts/person", { "pic": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction" } ], "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "pic": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny" }
JSON-LD
uses
a
special
type
of
machine-readable
document
called
a
vocabulary
to
define
term
s
that
are
then
used
to
describe
concepts
and
"things"
"things"
in
the
world.
Typically,
these
vocabulary
documents
have
prefix
es
associated
with
them
and
contain
a
number
of
term
declarations.
Prefix
es
are
helpful
when
a
developer
wants
to
mix
multiple
vocabularies
together
in
a
context
,
but
does
not
want
to
go
to
the
trouble
of
defining
every
single
term
in
every
single
vocabulary.
Some
Web
Vocabularies
vocabularies
may
have
dozens
of
terms
defined.
If
a
developer
wants
to
use
3-4
different
vocabularies
,
the
number
of
terms
that
would
have
to
be
declared
in
a
single
context
could
become
quite
large.
To
reduce
the
number
of
different
terms
that
must
be
defined,
JSON-LD
also
allows
prefixes
to
be
used
to
compact
IRIs.
IRIs
.
For
example,
the
IRI
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
specifies
a
vocabulary
which
may
be
represented
using
the
foaf
prefix
.
The
foaf
vocabulary
contains
a
term
called
name
.
If
you
join
the
foaf
prefix
with
the
name
suffix,
you
can
build
a
compact
IRI
that
will
expand
out
into
an
absolute
IRI
for
the
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
vocabulary
term.
That
is,
the
compact
IRI
(or
short-form),
is
foaf:name
and
the
expanded-form
is
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
.
This
vocabulary
term
is
used
to
specify
a
person's
name.
Developers, and machines, are able to use this IRI (by plugging it directly into a web browser, for instance) to go to the term and get a definition of what the term means. Much like we can use WordNet today to see the definition of words in the English language. Developers and machines need the same sort of definition of terms. IRIs provide a way to ensure that these terms are unambiguous.
The
context
provides
a
collection
of
vocabulary
term
s
and
prefix
es
that
can
be
used
to
expand
JSON
keys
and
values
into
IRI
s.
IRIs
.
To ensure the best possible performance, it is a best practice to put the context definition at the top of the JSON-LD document. If it isn't listed first, processors have to save each key-value pair until the context is processed. This creates a memory and complexity burden for one-pass processors.
If a set of term s such as, name , homepage , and depiction , are defined in a context , and that context is used to resolve the names in JSON objects, machines are able to automatically expand the terms to something meaningful and unambiguous, like this:
{ "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny", "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org" "http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny" }
Doing this allows JSON to be unambiguously machine-readable without requiring developers to drastically change their workflow.
The
example
above
does
not
use
the
@id
keyword
to
set
the
subject
of
the
node
being
described
above.
This
type
of
node
is
called
an
unlabeled
node
and
is
considered
to
be
a
weaker
form
of
Linked
Data
.
It
is
advised
that
all
nodes
described
in
JSON-LD
are
given
unique
identifiers
via
the
@id
keyword
unless
the
data
is
not
intended
to
be
linked
to
from
other
data
sets.
JSON-LD is designed to ensure that Linked Data concepts can be marked up in a way that is simple to understand and create by Web authors. In many cases, regular JSON markup can become Linked Data with the simple addition of a context . As more JSON-LD features are used, more semantics are added to the JSON markup.
Expressing IRI s are fundamental to Linked Data as that is how most subject s, all properties and many object s are identified. IRI s can be expressed in a variety of different ways in JSON-LD.
@id
or
@type
.
@id
.
IRIs
may
be
represented
as
an
absolute
IRI
,
,
a
relative
IRI
,
a
term
,
or
a
compact
IRI
.
An
absolute
IRI
is
defined
in
[
RFC3987
]
containing
a
scheme
along
with
path
and
optional
query
and
fragment
segments.
A
relative
IRI
is
an
IRI
that
is
relative
to
some
other
absolute
IRI
;
in
the
case
of
JSON-LD
this
is
the
base
location
of
the
document,
a
term
,
or
a
prefix
:suffix
construct.
document.
IRIs can be expressed directly in the key position like so:
{
...
"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny",
...
}
In
the
example
above,
the
key
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
is
interpreted
as
an
IRI
,
as
opposed
to
being
interpreted
as
a
string.
Term expansion occurs for IRIs if the value matches a term defined within the active context :
{ "@context": { "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name" ... }, "name": "Manu Sporny", ... }
Prefix
es
are
expanded
when
the
form
of
the
value
compact
IRI
represented
as
is
prefix:suffix
,
and
the
prefix
matches
a
term
defined
within
the
active
context
:
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" ... }, "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny", ... }
Term s are case sensitive, and must be matched using a case-sensitive comparison.
Keys that do not expand to an absolute IRI are ignored.
It is not determined if processing proceeds into values of undefined keys. If so, this would result in a graph which is not embedded .
foaf:name
above
will
automatically
expand
out
to
the
IRI
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
.
See
Prefixes
Compact
IRIs
for
more
details.
An
IRI
is
generated
when
a
value
is
associated
with
a
key
using
the
@id
keyword:
{
...
"homepage": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org" }
...
}
Specifying
a
JSON
Object
with
an
@id
key
is
used
to
identify
that
object
using
an
IRI
.
This
facility
may
also
be
used
to
link
a
subject
with
an
object
using
a
mechanism
called
embedding
,
which
is
covered
in
the
section
titled
Embedding
.
If
type
coercion
rules
are
specified
in
the
@context
for
a
particular
term
or
property
IRI
,
an
IRI
is
generated:
{
"@context":
{
...
"homepage":
{
"@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
"@type": "@id"
}
...
}
...
"homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
...
}
Even
though
the
value
http://manu.sporny.org/
is
a
string
,
the
type
coercion
rules
will
transform
the
value
into
an
IRI
when
processed
by
a
JSON-LD
Processor.
To be able to externally reference nodes, it is important that each node has an unambiguous identifier. IRI s are a fundamental concept of Linked Data , and nodes should have a de-referencable identifier used to name and locate them. For nodes to be truly linked, de-referencing the identifier should result in a representation of that node. Associating an IRI with a node tells an application that the returned document contains a description of the node requested.
JSON-LD documents may also contain descriptions of other nodes, so it is necessary to be able to uniquely identify each node which may be externally referenced.
A
subject
of
an
object
in
JSON
is
declared
using
the
@id
key.
The
subject
is
the
first
piece
of
information
needed
by
the
JSON-LD
processor
in
order
to
create
the
(subject,
property,
object)
tuple,
also
known
as
a
triple.
{ ... "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob", ... }
The
example
above
would
set
the
subject
to
the
IRI
http://example.org/people#joebob
.
To
ensure
the
best
possible
performance,
it
is
a
best
practice
to
put
the
@id
keyword
before
other
key-value
pairs
in
an
object.
If
it
isn't
listed
first,
processors
have
to
save
each
key-value
pair
until
@id
is
processed
before
they
can
start
generating
triples.
Not
specifying
the
@id
keyword
first
creates
a
memory
and
complexity
burden
for
one-pass
processors.
The
type
of
a
particular
subject
can
be
specified
using
the
@type
keyword.
Specifying
the
type
in
this
way
will
generate
a
triple
of
the
form
(subject,
type,
type-
IRI
).
To
be
considered
Linked
Data
,
types
must
be
uniquely
identified
by
an
IRI
.
{ ... "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob", "@type": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person", ... }
Regular text strings, also referred to as string value s, are easily expressed using regular JSON string s.
{
...
"name": "Mark Birbeck",
...
}
JSON-LD makes an assumption that strings with associated language encoding information are not very common when used in JavaScript and Web Services. Thus, it takes a little more effort to express strings with associated language information.
{
...
"name":
{
"@value": "花澄",
"@language": "ja"
}
...
}
The
example
above
would
generate
a
string
value
for
花澄
and
associate
the
ja
language
code
with
the
triple
that
is
generated.
Languages
must
be
expressed
in
[
BCP47
]
format.
A value with an associated type, also known as a typed value , is indicated by associating a value with an IRI which indicates the value's type. Typed values may be expressed in JSON-LD in three ways:
@type
keyword
when
defining
a
term
within
a
@context
section.
The
first
example
uses
the
@type
keyword
to
express
a
typed
value:
{
"@context":
{
"xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
"modified":
{
"@id": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified",
"@type": "xsd:dateTime"
}
}
...
"modified": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
...
}
The second example uses the expanded form for specifying objects:
{
...
"modified":
{
"@value": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
"@type": "xsd:dateTime"
}
...
}
Both
examples
above
would
generate
an
object
with
the
value
of
2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00
and
the
type
of
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime
.
The third example uses a built-in native JSON type, a number , to express a type:
{
...
"@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
"age": 31
...
}
The example above is really just a shorthand for the following:
{
...
"@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
"age":
{
"@value": "31",
"@type": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"
}
...
}
The
@type
keyword
is
also
used
to
associate
a
type
with
a
subject
.
Although
the
same
keyword
is
used
in
both
places,
the
concept
of
an
object
type
and
a
value
type
are
different.
This
is
similar
to
object-oriented
programming
languages
where
both
scalar
and
structured
types
use
the
same
class
inheritance
mechanism,
even
though
scalar
types
and
structured
types
are
inherently
different.
A JSON-LD author can express multiple values in a compact way by using array s. If a subject has multiple values for the same property, the author may express each property as an array .
In JSON-LD, multiple objects on a property are not ordered. This is because graphs are inherently unordered data structures. To learn more about creating ordered collections in JSON-LD, see the section on Lists .
{
...
"@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
"nick": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ],
...
}
The markup shown above would generate the following triples:
<http://example.org/people#joebob> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/nick> "joe" . <http://example.org/people#joebob> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/nick> "bob" . <http://example.org/people#joebob> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/nick> "jaybee" .
Multiple value s may also be expressed using the expanded form for object s:
{
"@id": "http://example.org/articles/8",
"dc:title":
[
{
"@value": "Das Kapital",
"@language": "de"
},
{
"@value": "Capital",
"@language": "en"
}
]
}
The markup shown above would generate the following triples:
<http://example.org/articles/8> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/title> "Das Kapital"@de . <http://example.org/articles/8> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/title> "Capital"@en .
Because graphs do not describe ordering for links between nodes, in contrast to plain JSON, multi-valued properties in JSON-LD do not provide an ordering of the listed objects. For example, consider the following simple document:
{
...
"@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
"nick": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ],
...
}
This results in three triples being generated, each relating the subject to an individual object, with no inherent order.
As
the
notion
of
ordered
collections
is
rather
important
in
data
modeling,
it
is
useful
to
have
specific
language
support.
In
JSON-LD,
a
list
may
be
represented
using
the
@list
keyword
as
follows:
{
...
"@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
"foaf:nick":
{
"@list": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ]
},
...
}
This
describes
the
use
of
this
array
as
being
ordered,
and
order
is
maintained
through
alternate
representations
as
described
in
[
JSON-LD-API
].
If
every
use
of
a
given
multi-valued
property
is
a
list,
this
may
be
abbreviated
by
adding
a
setting
@type
@container
coercion
to
@list
in
the
context
:
{ "@context": { ... "nick": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/nick", "@container": "@list" } }, ... "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob", "nick": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ], ... }
List
coercion
is
specified
within
an
expanded
term
definition
using
the
key.
The
value
of
this
key,
if
present,
must
be
@list
@container
.
This
indicates
that
array
values
of
keys
coerced
as
true
@list
@list
are
to
be
serialized
as
a
List
.
List of lists are not allowed in this version of JSON-LD. If a list of lists is detected, a JSON-LD processor will throw an exception.
JSON-LD has a number of features that provide functionality above and beyond the core functionality described above. The following sections outline the features that are specific to JSON-LD.
Term
s
in
Linked
Data
documents
may
draw
from
a
number
of
different
vocabularies
.
At
times,
declaring
every
single
term
that
a
document
uses
can
require
the
developer
to
declare
tens,
if
not
hundreds
of
potential
vocabulary
term
s
that
are
used
across
an
application.
This
is
a
concern
for
at
least
three
reasons;
the
first
is
the
cognitive
load
on
the
developer
of
remembering
all
of
the
term
s,
the
second
is
the
serialized
size
of
the
context
if
it
is
specified
inline,
the
third
is
future-proofing
embedded
application
context
s
that
may
not
be
easy
to
change
after
they
are
deployed.
In
order
to
address
these
issues,
the
concept
of
a
prefix
compact
IRI
mechanism
is
introduced.
A
prefix
compact
IRI
is
a
compact
way
of
expressing
a
base
an
IRI
for
using
a
vocabulary
.
prefix
and
suffix
.
Generally,
these
prefixes
are
used
by
concatenating
the
prefix
and
a
suffix
,
which
is
separated
by
a
colon
(
:
).
The
prefix
is
a
term
taken
from
the
active
context
and
is
a
short
string
identifying
a
particular
IRI
in
a
JSON-LD
document.
For
example,
the
prefix
foaf
may
be
used
as
a
short
hand
for
the
Friend-of-a-Friend
vocabulary,
which
is
identified
using
the
IRI
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
.
A
developer
may
append
any
of
the
FOAF
vocabulary
terms
to
the
end
of
the
prefix
to
specify
a
short-hand
version
of
the
absolute
IRI
for
the
vocabulary
term.
For
example,
foaf:name
would
be
expanded
out
to
the
IRI
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
.
Instead
of
having
to
remember
and
type
out
the
entire
IRI
,
the
developer
can
instead
use
the
prefix
in
their
JSON-LD
markup.
To
generate
an
Terms
are
interpreted
as
compact
IRI
out
of
a
s
if
they
contain
at
least
one
colon
and
the
first
colon
is
not
followed
by
two
slashes
(
,
as
in
prefix:suffix
//
http://example.com
construct,
).
To
generate
the
full
IRI
,
the
value
is
first
split
into
a
prefix
and
suffix
at
the
first
occurrence
of
a
colon
(
:
).
If
the
active
context
contains
a
term
mapping
for
prefix
,
an
IRI
is
generated
by
prepending
the
mapped
prefix
to
the
(possibly
empty)
suffix
using
textual
concatenation.
If
no
prefix
mapping
is
defined,
the
value
is
used
directly
as
an
absolute
IRI
.
.
If
the
prefix
is
an
underscore
(
_
),
the
IRI
remains
unchanged.
This
effectively
means
that
every
term
containing
a
colon
will
be
interpreted
by
a
JSON-LD
processor
as
an
IRI
.
The
ability
to
use
prefix
compact
IRIs
es
reduces
the
need
for
developers
to
declare
every
vocabulary
term
that
they
intend
to
use
in
the
JSON-LD
context
.
This
reduces
stand-alone
JSON-LD
document
serialization
size
because
every
vocabulary
term
need
not
be
declared
in
the
embedded
context.
Prefix
Compact
IRIs
also
reduces
the
cognitive
load
on
the
developer.
It
is
far
easier
to
remember
foaf:name
than
it
is
to
remember
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
.
The
use
of
prefixes
also
ensures
that
a
context
document
does
not
have
to
be
updated
in
lock-step
with
an
externally
defined
vocabulary
.
Without
prefixes,
a
developer
would
need
to
keep
their
application
context
terms
in
lock-step
with
an
externally
defined
vocabulary.
Rather,
by
just
declaring
the
vocabulary
prefix,
one
can
use
new
terms
as
they're
declared
without
having
to
update
the
application's
JSON-LD
context
.
Consider the following example:
{ "@context": { "dc": "http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/", "ex": "http://example.org/vocab#" }, "@id": "http://example.org/library", "@type": "ex:Library", "ex:contains": { "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic", "@type": "ex:Book", "dc:creator": "Plato", "dc:title": "The Republic", "ex:contains": { "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic#introduction", "@type": "ex:Chapter", "dc:description": "An introductory chapter on The Republic.", "dc:title": "The Introduction" } } }
In
this
example,
two
different
vocabularies
are
referred
to
using
prefixes.
Those
prefixes
are
then
used
as
type
and
property
values
using
the
compact
IRI
prefix:suffix
notation.
Prefixes,
It's
also
possible
to
use
compact
IRIs
within
the
context
as
shown
in
the
following
example:
{ "@context": { "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#", "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/", "foaf:homepage": { "@type": "@id" }, "picture": { "@id": "foaf:depiction", "@type": "@id" } }, "@subject": "http://me.markus-lanthaler.com/", "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Markus Lanthaler", "foaf:homepage": "http://www.markus-lanthaler.com/", "picture": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/markuslanthaler" }
Compact
IRIs
,
also
known
as
CURIEs,
are
defined
more
formally
in
RDFa
Core
1.1,
Section
6
"CURIE
"CURIE
Syntax
Definition"
Definition"
[
RDFA-CORE
].
JSON-LD
does
not
support
the
square-bracketed
CURIE
syntax
as
the
mechanism
is
not
required
to
disambiguate
IRI
s
in
a
JSON-LD
document
like
it
is
in
HTML
documents.
Authors may choose to declare JSON-LD context s in external documents to promote re-use of contexts as well as reduce the size of JSON-LD documents.
In
order
to
use
an
external
context,
an
author
may
must
specify
an
IRI
to
a
valid
JSON-LD
document.
The
referenced
document
must
have
a
top-level
JSON
Object
.
The
value
of
any
@context
key
within
that
object
is
substituted
for
the
IRI
within
the
referencing
document
to
have
the
same
effect
as
if
the
value
were
specified
inline
within
the
referencing
document.
The following example demonstrates the use of an external context:
{
"@context": "http://json-ld.org/contexts/person",
"name": "Manu Sporny",
"homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
"depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
}
Authors may also import multiple contexts or a combination of external and local contexts by specifying a list of contexts:
{ "@context": [ "http://json-ld.org/contexts/person", { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "http://json-ld.org/contexts/event", ] "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny" "celebrates": { "@type": "Event", "description": "International Talk Like a Pirate Day", "date": "R/2011-09-19" } }
Each context in a list will be evaluated in-order. Duplicate mappings among the context s must be overwritten on a last-defined-overrides basis. The context list must contain either de-referenceable IRI s or JSON Object s that conform to the context syntax as described in this document.
An author may nest contexts within JSON object s, with the more deeply nested contexts overriding the values in previously defined contexts:
{ "@context": { "name": "http://example.com/person#name", "details": "http://example.com/person#details" }, "name": "Markus Lanthaler", ... "details": { "@context": { "name": "http://example.com/organization#name" }, "name": "Graz University of Technology" } }
In
the
example
above,
the
name
prefix
is
overridden
in
the
more
deeply
nested
details
structure.
Note
that
this
is
rarely
a
good
authoring
practice
and
is
typically
used
when
the
JSON
object
has
legacy
applications
using
the
structure
of
the
object.
External
JSON-LD
context
documents
may
contain
extra
information
located
outside
of
the
@context
key,
such
as
documentation
about
the
prefix
prefixes
es
declared
in
the
document.
When
importing
a
@context
value
from
an
external
JSON-LD
context
document,
any
extra
information
contained
outside
of
the
@context
value
must
be
discarded.
It
is
also
recommended
that
a
human-readable
document
encoded
in
HTML+RDFa
[
HTML-RDFA
]
or
other
Linked
Data
compatible
format
is
served
as
well
to
explain
the
correct
usage
of
the
JSON-LD
context
document.
Ordinary
JSON
documents
can
be
transformed
in
JSON-LD
documents
by
referencing
to
an
external
JSON-LD
context
in
an
HTTP
Link
Header.
Doing
this
allows
JSON
to
be
unambiguously
machine-readable
without
requiring
developers
to
drastically
change
their
workflow
and
provides
an
upgrade
path
for
existing
infrastructure
without
breaking
existing
clients
that
rely
on
the
application/json
media
type.
In
order
to
use
an
external
context
with
an
ordinary
JSON
document,
an
author
must
specify
an
IRI
to
a
valid
JSON-LD
document
in
an
HTTP
Link
Header
[
RFC5988
]
using
the
describedby
link
relation.
The
referenced
document
must
have
a
top-level
JSON
Object
.
The
@context
subtree
within
that
object
is
added
to
the
top-level
object
of
the
referencing
document.
If
an
array
is
at
the
top-level
of
the
referencing
document
and
its
items
are
objects,
the
@context
subtree
is
added
to
all
array
items.
All
extra
information
located
outside
of
the
@context
subtree
in
the
referenced
document
must
be
discarded.
The following example demonstrates the use of an external context with an ordinary JSON document:
GET /ordinary-json-document.json HTTP/1.1
Host: example.com
Accept: application/json,*/*;q=0.1
----------------------------------------------------
HTTP/1.0 200 OK
...
Content-Type: application/json
Link: <http://json-ld.org/contexts/person>; rel="describedby"; type="application/ld+json"
{
"name": "Markus Lanthaler",
"homepage": "http://www.markus-lanthaler.com/",
"depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/markuslanthaler"
}
JSON-LD documents must have all context information, including references to external contexts, within the body of the document.
JSON-LD allows a default value to use as the language for string value s. It is commonly the case that documents are written using a single language. As described in String Internationalization , a language-tagged value may be specified as follows:
{
...
"name":
{
"@value": "花澄",
"@language": "ja"
}
}
It
is
also
possible
to
apply
a
particular
language
code
to
all
string
value
s
by
setting
the
@language
key
in
the
@context
:
{ "@context": { ... "@language": "ja" }, "name": "花澄", "occupation": "科学者" }
The
example
above
would
generate
a
string
value
for
花澄
and
科学者
and
associate
the
ja
language
code
with
each
value.
It is possible to override the default language by using the expanded form of a value:
{
"@context":
{
...
"@language": "ja"
},
"name": "花澄",
"occupation":
{
"@value": "Scientist",
"@language": "en"
}
}
It
is
also
possible
to
override
the
default
language
and
specify
a
plain
value
by
omitting
the
@language
tag
when
expressing
the
expanded
value:
{
"@context":
{
...
"@language": "ja"
},
"name": "花澄",
"occupation":
{
"@value": "Ninja"
}
}
Object
properties
that
use
the
expanded
form
are
considered
explicitly
defined.
The
@language
keyword,
when
used
in
the
context
,
must
only
be
applied
to
string
value
s.
That
is,
string
value
s
expressed
in
expanded
form
are
not
affected
by
the
@language
keyword,
when
it
is
used
in
the
context
.
To
clear
the
default
language
for
a
subtree,
@language
can
be
set
to
null
in
a
local
context
as
follows:
{
"@context":
{
...
"@language": "ja"
},
"name": "花澄",
"details":
{
"@context":
{
"@language": null
},
"occupation": "Ninja"
}
}
Within a context definition, term s may be defined using an expanded notation to allow for additional information associated with the term to be specified (see Type Coercion and Lists ).
Instead
of
using
a
string
representation
of
an
IRI
,
the
IRI
may
be
specified
using
an
object
having
an
@id
key.
The
value
of
the
@id
key
must
be
either
a
prefix
:suffix
value,
an
IRI
.
Type
information
may
be
specified
{ "@context": { "foaf": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "name": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name" }, "homepage": { "@id": "foaf:homepage" }, "depiction": { "@id": "foaf:depiction" } }, "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny" }
Since JSON is capable of expressing typed information such as doubles, integers, and boolean values. As demonstrated below, JSON-LD utilizes that information to create typed value s:
{ ... // The following two values are automatically converted to a type of xsd:double // and both values are equivalent to each other. "measure:cups": 5.3, "measure:cups": 5.3e0, // The following value is automatically converted to a type of xsd:double as well "space:astronomicUnits": 6.5e73, // The following value is never converted to a language-native type "measure:stones": { "@value": "4.8", "@type": "xsd:decimal" }, // This value is automatically converted to having a type of xsd:integer "chem:protons": 12, // This value is automatically converted to having a type of xsd:boolean "sensor:active": true, ... }
When
dealing
with
a
number
of
modern
programming
languages,
including
JavaScript
ECMA-262,
there
is
no
distinction
between
xsd:decimal
and
xsd:double
values.
That
is,
the
number
5.3
and
the
number
5.3e0
are
treated
as
if
they
were
the
same.
When
converting
from
JSON-LD
to
a
language-native
format
and
back,
type
information
is
lost
in
a
number
of
these
languages.
Thus,
one
could
say
that
5.3
is
a
xsd:decimal
and
5.3e0
is
an
xsd:double
in
JSON-LD,
but
when
both
values
are
converted
to
a
language-native
format
the
type
difference
between
the
two
is
lost
because
the
machine-level
representation
will
almost
always
be
a
double
.
Implementers
should
be
aware
of
this
potential
round-tripping
issue
between
xsd:decimal
and
xsd:double
.
Specifically
objects
with
a
type
of
xsd:decimal
must
not
be
converted
to
a
language
native
type.
JSON-LD supports the coercion of values to particular data types. Type coercion allows someone deploying JSON-LD to coerce the incoming or outgoing types to the proper data type based on a mapping of data type IRI s to property types. Using type coercion, value representation is preserved without requiring the data type to be specified with each usage.
Type
coercion
is
specified
within
an
expanded
term
definition
using
the
@type
key.
The
values
of
this
key
represent
type
IRIs
and
must
take
the
form
of
term
,
prefix
:suffix,
compact
IRI
,
absolute
IRI
or
the
keyword
@id
.
Specifying
@id
indicates
that
within
the
body
of
a
JSON-LD
document,
string
values
of
keys
coerced
as
@id
are
to
be
interpreted
as
IRI
s.
Terms
or
prefixes
compact
IRIs
used
as
the
value
of
a
@type
key
may
be
defined
within
the
same
context.
The example below demonstrates how a JSON-LD author can coerce values to typed value s, IRIs and lists.
{ "@context": { "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#", "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "age": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@type": "xsd:integer" }, "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id", "@container": "@list" } }, "name": "John Smith", "age": "41", "homepage": [ "http://personal.example.org/", "http://work.example.com/jsmith/" ] }
The example above would generate the following Turtle:
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> . [ foaf:name "John Smith"; foaf:age "41"^^xsd:integer; foaf:homepage ( <http://personal.example.org/> <http://work.example.com/jsmith/> ) ] .
Terms may also be defined using absolute IRIs or compact IRIs . This allows coercion rules to by applied to keys which are not represented as a simple term . For example:
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/", "foaf:age": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"", "@type": "xsd:integer" }, "foaf:homepage": { "@type": "@id" } }
In
this
case,
the
@id
definition
is
optional,
but
if
it
does
exist,
the
compact
IRI
or
IRI
is
treated
as
a
term
so
that
the
actual
definition
of
a
prefix
becomes
unnecessary.
To
be
consistent
with
JSON-LD,
in
general,
anywhere
an
IRI
is
expected,
normal
IRI
expansion
rules
apply
(see
IRIs
).
Within
a
context
definition,
this
can
mean
that
terms
defined
within
a
given
context
may
also
be
used
within
that
context,
as
long
as
there
are
no
circular
dependencies.
For
example,
it
is
common
to
use
the
xsd
namespace
when
defining
typed
value
s:
{ "@context": { "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#", "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "age": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@type": "xsd:integer" }, "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id" } }, ... }
In
this
example,
the
xsd
term
is
defined,
and
used
as
a
prefix
for
the
@type
coercion
of
the
age
property.
Term s may also be used when defining the IRI of another term :
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/", "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#", "name": "foaf:name", "age": { "@id": "foaf:age", "@type": "xsd:integer" }, "homepage": { "@id": "foaf:homepage", "@type": "@id" } }, ... }
Term s may also be used on the left-hand side of a definition.
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/", "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#", "name": "foaf:name", "foaf:age": { "@id": "foaf:age", "@type": "xsd:integer" }, "foaf:homepage": { "@type": "@id" } }, ... }
Note
that
in
this
example,
the
prefixed
compact
IRI
form
is
used
in
two
different
ways.
The
first
way,
as
shown
with
foaf:age
declares
both
the
IRI
for
the
term
(using
short-form)
as
well
as
the
@type
associated
with
the
term
.
The
second
way,
only
declares
the
@type
associated
with
the
term
.
In
the
second
case,
the
JSON-LD
processor
will
still
derive
the
full
IRI
by
looking
up
the
foaf
prefix
in
the
context
for
foaf:homepage
.
Full IRIs may also be used on the left-hand side of a context :
{
"@context":
{
"foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
"xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
"name": "foaf:name",
"foaf:age":
{
"@id": "foaf:age",
"@type": "xsd:integer"
},
"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage":
{
"@type": "@id"
}
},
...
}
Note
that
in
order
for
the
full
IRI
to
match
above,
the
full
IRI
must
also
be
used
in
the
JSON-LD
document.
Also
note
that
foaf:homepage
will
not
use
the
{
declaration
because
"@type":
"@id"
"@type":
"@id"
}
foaf:homepage
is
not
the
same
as
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage
.
That
is,
a
JSON-LD
processor
will
use
direct
string
comparison
when
looking
up
term
s
in
a
context
before
it
applies
the
prefix
lookup
mechanism.
The only exception for using terms in the context is that they must not be used in a circular manner. That is, a definition of term-1 must not depend on the definition of term-2 if term-2 also depends on term-1 . For example, the following context definition is illegal:
{
"@context":
{
"term1": "term2:foo",
"term2": "term1:bar"
},
...
}
Object embedding is a JSON-LD feature that allows an author to use the definition of JSON-LD objects as property values. This is a commonly used mechanism for creating a parent-child relationship between two subject s.
The
example
shows
an
two
subjects
related
by
a
property
from
the
first
subject:
{ ... "name": "Manu Sporny", "knows": { "@type": "Person", "name": "Gregg Kellogg", } ... }
An object definition, like the one used above, may be used as a JSON value at any point in JSON-LD.
At
times,
it
becomes
necessary
to
be
able
to
express
information
without
being
able
to
specify
the
subject.
Typically,
this
type
of
node
is
called
an
unlabeled
node
or
a
blank
node.
In
JSON-LD,
unlabeled
node
identifiers
are
automatically
created
if
a
subject
is
not
specified
using
the
@id
keyword.
However,
authors
may
provide
identifiers
for
unlabeled
nodes
by
using
the
special
_
(underscore)
prefix
.
This
allows
to
reference
the
node
locally
within
the
document
but
not
in
an
external
document.
{
...
"@id": "_:foo",
...
}
The
example
above
would
set
the
subject
to
_:foo
,
which
can
then
be
used
later
on
in
the
JSON-LD
markup
to
refer
back
to
the
unlabeled
node.
This
practice,
however,
is
usually
frowned
upon
when
generating
Linked
Data
.
If
a
developer
finds
that
they
refer
to
the
unlabeled
node
more
than
once,
they
should
consider
naming
the
node
using
a
resolve-able
IRI
.
JSON-LD
allows
all
of
the
syntax
keywords,
except
for
@context
,
to
be
aliased.
This
feature
allows
more
legacy
JSON
content
to
be
supported
by
JSON-LD.
It
also
allows
developers
to
design
domain-specific
implementations
using
only
the
JSON-LD
context
.
{ "@context": { "url": "@id", "a": "@type", "name": "http://schema.org/name" }, "url": "http://example.com/about#gregg", "a": "http://schema.org/Person", "name": "Gregg Kellogg" }
In
the
example
above,
the
@id
and
@type
keywords
have
been
given
the
aliases
url
and
a
,
respectively.
The JSON-LD API [ JSON-LD-API ] defines an method for expanding a JSON-LD document. Expansion is the process of taking a JSON-LD document and applying a context such that all IRI , datatypes, and literal values are expanded so that the context is no longer necessary. JSON-LD document expansion is typically used as a part of Framing .
For example, assume the following JSON-LD input document:
{ "@context": { "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type", "@id" } }, "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/" }
Running the JSON-LD Expansion algorithm against the JSON-LD input document provided above would result in the following output:
{ "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny", "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/" } }
The JSON-LD API [ JSON-LD-API ] defines an method for compacting a JSON-LD document. Compaction is the process of taking a JSON-LD document and applying a context such that the most compact form of the document is generated. JSON is typically expressed in a very compact, key-value format. That is, full IRIs are rarely used as keys. At times, a JSON-LD document may be received that is not in its most compact form. JSON-LD, via the API, provides a way to compact a JSON-LD document.
For example, assume the following JSON-LD input document:
{ "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny", "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/" } }
Additionally, assume the following developer-supplied JSON-LD context:
{ "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id" } }
Running the JSON-LD Compaction algorithm given the context supplied above against the JSON-LD input document provided above would result in the following output:
{ "@context": { "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id" } }, "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/" }
The
compaction
algorithm
also
enables
the
developer
to
map
any
expanded
format
into
an
application-specific
compacted
format.
While
the
context
provided
above
mapped
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
to
name
,
it
could
have
also
mapped
it
to
any
arbitrary
string
provided
by
the
developer.
The JSON-LD API [ JSON-LD-API ] defines an method for framing a JSON-LD document. This allows developers to query by example and force a specific tree layout to a JSON-LD document.
A JSON-LD document is a representation of a directed graph. A single directed graph can have many different serializations, each expressing exactly the same information. Developers typically work with trees, represented as JSON object s. While mapping a graph to a tree can be done, the layout of the end result must be specified in advance. A Frame can be used by a developer on a JSON-LD document to specify a deterministic layout for a graph.
Framing is the process of taking a JSON-LD document, which expresses a graph of information, and applying a specific graph layout (called a Frame ).
The JSON-LD document below expresses a library, a book and a chapter:
{ "@context": { "Book": "http://example.org/vocab#Book", "Chapter": "http://example.org/vocab#Chapter", "contains": { "@id": "http://example.org/vocab#contains", "@type": "@id" }, "creator": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator", "description": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/description", "Library": "http://example.org/vocab#Library", "title": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/title" }, "@id": [{ "@id": "http://example.com/library", "@type": "Library", "contains": "http://example.org/library/the-republic" }, { "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic", "@type": "Book", "creator": "Plato", "title": "The Republic", "contains": "http://example.org/library/the-republic#introduction" }, { "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic#introduction", "@type": "Chapter", "description": "An introductory chapter on The Republic.", "title": "The Introduction" }] }
Developers typically like to operate on items in a hierarchical, tree-based fashion. Ideally, a developer would want the data above sorted into top-level libraries, then the books that are contained in each library, and then the chapters contained in each book. To achieve that layout, the developer can define the following frame :
{ "@context": { "Book": "http://example.org/vocab#Book", "Chapter": "http://example.org/vocab#Chapter", "contains": "http://example.org/vocab#contains", "creator": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator" "description": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/description" "Library": "http://example.org/vocab#Library", "title": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/title" }, "@type": "Library", "contains": { "@type": "Book", "contains": { "@type": "Chapter" } } }
When the framing algorithm is run against the previously defined JSON-LD document, paired with the frame above, the following JSON-LD document is the end result:
{ "@context": { "Book": "http://example.org/vocab#Book", "Chapter": "http://example.org/vocab#Chapter", "contains": "http://example.org/vocab#contains", "creator": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator" "description": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/description" "Library": "http://example.org/vocab#Library", "title": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/title" }, "@id": "http://example.org/library", "@type": "Library", "contains": { "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic", "@type": "Book", "creator": "Plato", "title": "The Republic", "contains": { "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic#introduction", "@type": "Chapter", "description": "An introductory chapter on The Republic.", "title": "The Introduction" }, }, }
The JSON-LD API [ JSON-LD-API ] defines an method for normalizing a JSON-LD document. Normalization is the process of performing a deterministic transformation on a JSON-LD document resulting in a normalized representation.
Normalization is useful when comparing two graphs against one another, when generating a detailed list of differences between two graphs, and when generating a cryptographic digital signature for information contained in a graph or when generating a hash of the information contained in a graph.
The example below is an un-normalized JSON-LD document:
{ "@context": { "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id" }, "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" }, "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/" }
The example below is the normalized form of the JSON-LD document above:
[{ "@id": "_:c14n0", "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/" }, "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny" }]
Notice how all of the term s have been expanded and sorted in alphabetical order. Also, notice how the subject has been labeled with a named unlabeled node . Normalization ensures that any arbitrary graph containing exactly the same information would be normalized to exactly the same form shown above.
This section is non-normative.
JSON-LD
is
a
specification
for
representing
Linked
Data
in
JSON.
A
common
way
of
working
with
Linked
Data
is
through
RDF
,
the
Resource
Description
Framework.
RDF
can
be
expressed
using
JSON-LD
by
associating
JSON-LD
concepts
such
as
@id
and
@type
with
the
equivalent
IRI
s
in
RDF.
Further
information
about
RDF
may
be
found
in
[
RDF-PRIMER
].
The JSON-LD markup examples below demonstrate how JSON-LD can be used to express semantic data marked up in other languages such as Turtle, RDFa, Microformats, and Microdata. These sections are merely provided as proof that JSON-LD is very flexible in what it can express across different Linked Data approaches. Details of transforming JSON-LD into RDF are defined in [ JSON-LD-API ].
The following are examples of representing RDF as expressed in [ TURTLE ] into JSON-LD.
The
JSON-LD
context
has
direct
equivalents
for
the
Turtle
@prefix
declaration:
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <http://manu.sporny.org/i/public> a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Manu Sporny"; foaf:homepage <http://manu.sporny.org/> .
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public", "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny", "foaf:homepage": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/" } }
JSON-LD
has
no
equivalent
for
the
Turtle
@base
declaration.
Authors
could,
of
course,
use
a
prefix
definition
to
resolve
relative
IRIs.
IRI
s.
For
example,
an
empty
prefix
could
be
used
to
get
a
similar
effect
to
@base
:
{ "@context": { "": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "@id": ":i/public", "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny", "foaf:homepage": { "@id": ":" } }
Both Turtle and JSON-LD allow embedding of objects, although Turtle only allows embedding of objects which use unlabeled node identifiers.
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <http://manu.sporny.org/i/public> a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Manu Sporny"; foaf:knows [ a foaf:Person; foaf:name"Gregg Kellogg""Gregg Kellogg" ] .
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public", "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny", "foaf:knows": { "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Gregg Kellogg" } }
Both JSON-LD and Turtle can represent sequential lists of values.
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <http://example.org/people#joebob> a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Joe Bob"; foaf:nick ("joe" "bob" "jaybee")"joe" "bob" "jaybee" ) .
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob", "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Joe Bob", "foaf:nick": { "@list": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybe" ] } }
The following example describes three people with their respective names and homepages.
<div prefix="foaf: http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"> <ul> <li typeof="foaf:Person"> <a rel="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/bob/" property="foaf:name" >Bob</a> </li> <li typeof="foaf:Person"> <a rel="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/eve/" property="foaf:name" >Eve</a> </li> <li typeof="foaf:Person"> <a rel="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/manu/" property="foaf:name" >Manu</a> </li> </ul> </div>
An
example
JSON-LD
implementation
using
a
single
context
is
described
below,
however,
there
are
other
ways
below.
The
syntax
to
mark-up
this
information
such
that
the
context
serialize
multiple
graphs
is
not
repeated.
currently
being
discussed
in
Issue
68
.
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "@id": [ { "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/bob/", "foaf:name": "Bob" }, { "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/eve/", "foaf:name": "Eve" }, { "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/manu/", "foaf:name": "Manu" } ] }
The following example uses a simple Microformats hCard example to express how the Microformat is represented in JSON-LD.
<div class="vcard"> <a class="url fn" href="http://www.markus-lanthaler.com/">Markus Lanthaler</a> </div>
The
representation
of
the
hCard
expresses
the
Microformat
terms
in
the
context
and
uses
them
directly
for
the
url
and
fn
properties.
Also
note
that
the
Microformat
to
JSON-LD
processor
has
generated
the
proper
URL
type
for
http://tantek.com/
.
{ "@context": { "vcard": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#vcard", "url": { "@id": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#url", "@type": "@id" }, "fn": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#fn" }, "@type": "vcard", "url": "http://www.markus-lanthaler.com/", "fn": "Markus Lanthaler" }
The microdata example below expresses book information as a microdata Work item.
<dl itemscope itemtype="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Work" itemid="http://purl.oreilly.com/works/45U8QJGZSQKDH8N"> <dt>Title</dt> <dd><cite itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/title">Just a Geek</cite></dd> <dt>By</dt> <dd><span itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator">Wil Wheaton</span></dd> <dt>Format</dt> <dd itemprop="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#realization" itemscope itemtype="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression" itemid="http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596007683.BOOK"> <link itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/type" href="http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/BOOK"> Print </dd> <dd itemprop="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#realization" itemscope itemtype="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression" itemid="http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596802189.EBOOK"> <link itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/type" href="http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/EBOOK"> Ebook </dd> </dl>
Note that the JSON-LD representation of the Microdata information stays true to the desires of the Microdata community to avoid contexts and instead refer to items by their full IRI .
[ { "@id": "http://purl.oreilly.com/works/45U8QJGZSQKDH8N", "@type": "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Work", "http://purl.org/dc/terms/title": "Just a Geek", "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator": "Whil Wheaton", "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#realization": [ "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596007683.BOOK", "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596802189.EBOOK" ] }, { "@id": "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596007683.BOOK", "@type": "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression", "http://purl.org/dc/terms/type": "http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/BOOK" }, { "@id": "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596802189.EBOOK", "@type": "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression", "http://purl.org/dc/terms/type": "http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/EBOOK" } ]
The following definition for Linked Data is the one that will be used for this specification.
Note that the definition for Linked Data above is silent on the topic of unlabeled nodes. Unlabeled nodes are not considered Linked Data . However, this specification allows for the expression of unlabled nodes, as most graph-based data sets on the Web contain a number of associated nodes that are not named and thus are not directly de-referenceable.
This section is non-normative.
Developers benefit by being able to mash other vocabularies into their JSON-LD markup. There are over 200 vocabularies that are available for use on the Web today. Some of these vocabularies include:
You can use these vocabularies in combination, like so:
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/", "sioc": "http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#", "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" }, "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny", "foaf:homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "sioc:avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny", "rdfs:comment": "Likes puppies, unicorns and rainbows." }
Developers
can
also
specify
their
own
vocabulary
documents
by
modifying
the
active
context
in-line
using
the
@context
keyword,
like
so:
{ "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/", "sioc": "http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#", "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#", "myvocab": "http://example.org/myvocab#" }, "@type": "foaf:Person", "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny", "foaf:homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "sioc:avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny", "rdfs:comment": "Likes puppies, unicorns and rainbows." "myvocab:personality": "friendly" }
This section is non-normative.
This section is included merely for standards community review and will be submitted to the Internet Engineering Steering Group if this specification becomes a W3C Recommendation.
form
expanded
,
and
normalized
.
If
no
form
is
specified
in
an
HTTP
request
header
to
an
HTTP
server,
the
server
may
choose
any
form.
If
no
form
is
specified
for
an
HTTP
client,
the
form
must
not
be
assumed
to
take
any
particular
form.
application/json
MIME
media
type.
eval()
function.
It
is
recommended
that
a
conforming
parser
does
not
attempt
to
directly
evaluate
the
JSON-LD
serialization
and
instead
purely
parse
the
input
into
a
language-native
data
structure.
This section is non-normative.
The editors would like to thank Mark Birbeck, who provided a great deal of the initial push behind the JSON-LD work via his work on RDFj, Dave Longley, Dave Lehn and Mike Johnson who reviewed, provided feedback, and performed several implementations of the specification, and Ian Davis, who created RDF/JSON. Thanks also to Nathan Rixham, Bradley P. Allen, Kingsley Idehen, Glenn McDonald, Alexandre Passant, Danny Ayers, Ted Thibodeau Jr., Olivier Grisel, Niklas Lindström, Markus Lanthaler, and Richard Cyganiak for their input on the specification.