You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
An easy mistake for context publisher is to forget to wrap their context in { "@context": ... }.
See for example https://openprovenance.org/prov-jsonld/2020-03-23/context.json
(yes, this context has other issue, but that's not relevant to my point here).
Unfortunately, the JSON-LD Playground does not report any error when asked to use that context. It just silently ignores it.
I guess the rationale was that the absence of @context was equivalent to an empty @context, but I would argue that the absence of @context in a resource that is explicitly used as a context is very likely to be an error instead, and should be reported.
An easy mistake for context publisher is to forget to wrap their context in
{ "@context": ... }
.See for example https://openprovenance.org/prov-jsonld/2020-03-23/context.json
(yes, this context has other issue, but that's not relevant to my point here).
Unfortunately, the JSON-LD Playground does not report any error when asked to use that context. It just silently ignores it.
I guess the rationale was that the absence of
@context
was equivalent to an empty@context
, but I would argue that the absence of@context
in a resource that is explicitly used as a context is very likely to be an error instead, and should be reported.By the way, that's other JSON-LD implementations (@gkellogg's or @timothee-haudebourg's) do.
Example in the playground where the invalid context is silently ignored.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: