Description

jmvanel

opened on Jan 12, 2018

Issue body actions

I tested
Example 76: Nested properties
from the 1.1. spec (in progress):
https://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#nested-properties

with the basic Java-json-ld program:
https://github.com/jsonld-java/jsonld-java#code-example

Adding this line in code:

  options.setProcessingMode(JsonLdOptions.JSON_LD_1_1);
// or tried also
  options.setProcessingMode(JsonLdOptions.JSON_LD_1_1_FRAME);

and ... it fails ! :(

Exception in thread "main" com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdError: invalid term definition: 1.1
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.createTermDefinition(Context.java:330)
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.parse(Context.java:279)
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.parse(Context.java:142)
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.parse(Context.java:286)
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdApi.expand(JsonLdApi.java:543)
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdApi.expand(JsonLdApi.java:997)
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdProcessor.expand(JsonLdProcessor.java:146)
	at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdProcessor.compact(JsonLdProcessor.java:51)

I found nothing regarding the status of Java-json-ld regarding JSON-LD 1.1 ;
I'm aware that this is a spec. in progress .

Activity

1. ansell commented on Jan 24, 2018

   

   ansell

   on Jan 24, 2018

   Member

   More actions

   Any contributions to support JSON-LD 1.1 features would be appreciated. So far the new features from the developing spec (that I am aware of) have not been specifically linked to JSON-LD 1.1.
2. gkellogg commented on Jan 24, 2018

   

   gkellogg

   on Jan 24, 2018

   More actions

   Not sure why you think that features being developed aren't linked to JSON-LD 1.1, as they're described in the 1.1 spec being developed by the CG, which is being used as input to the proposed WG (see charter.

   Main things of interest to people are:

   • Scoped Contexts
   • id maps and type maps (also for graphs)
   • transparent nesting of properties.

   In general, make JSON-LD look more like regular JSON used in the field and address issues that have been raised in the last several years.
3. umbreak commented on Aug 7, 2018

   

   umbreak

   on Aug 7, 2018

   Contributor

   More actions

   @reverse special key on framing would be another interesting feature to implement.
4. jeyendranbalakrishnan commented on Nov 14, 2018

   

   jeyendranbalakrishnan

   on Nov 14, 2018

   More actions

   Hello, wondering if there are any plans to support the json-ld 1.1 spec in jsonld-java.
   Thanks a lot!

   Reacted by mplattr3
5. ansell commented on Nov 14, 2018

   

   ansell

   on Nov 14, 2018

   Member

   More actions

   Any features that are sent as Pull Requests will be looked at, but there is no active work being done by me or Tristan on jsonld-java to add features for 1.1.
6. jeyendranbalakrishnan commented on Nov 15, 2018

   

   jeyendranbalakrishnan

   on Nov 15, 2018

   More actions

   Thanks for the clarification, Peter!
7. lroffia commented on Mar 6, 2019

   

   lroffia

   on Mar 6, 2019

   Contributor

   More actions

   Access to the following "@context": "https://www.w3.org/ns/td.jsonld" raises the following:

   com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdError: invalid term definition: 1.1
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.createTermDefinition(Context.java:334)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.parse(Context.java:281)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.parse(Context.java:209)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.parse(Context.java:144)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.Context.parse(Context.java:288)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdApi.expand(JsonLdApi.java:550)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdApi.expand(JsonLdApi.java:1027)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdProcessor.expand(JsonLdProcessor.java:146)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdProcessor.toRDF(JsonLdProcessor.java:505)
   at com.github.jsonldjava.core.JsonLdProcessor.toRDF(JsonLdProcessor.java:555)

   With reference to the specification 1.1 should be considered as number (looking at the code it seems like it accepts only as string)

Issue actions