JSON-LD Syntax 1.0

A Context-based JSON Serialization for Linking Data

Unofficial Draft 12 22 January 2012

Editors:
Manu Sporny , Digital Bazaar
Gregg Kellogg , Kellogg Associates
Authors:
Manu Sporny , Digital Bazaar
Dave Longley , Digital Bazaar
Gregg Kellogg , Kellogg Associates
Markus Lanthaler , Graz University of Technology
Mark Birbeck , Backplane Ltd.

This document is also available in this non-normative format: diff to previous version .


Abstract

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.

Status of This 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.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

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 of 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 to require only requires a very small memory footprint in order to operate.

1.1 How to Read this Document

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 processing algorithms and programming interfaces, interfaces for those see 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 Object
An object structure is represented as a pair of curly brackets surrounding zero or more name/value pairs (or members). A name is a string . A single colon comes after each name, separating the name from the value. A single comma separates a value from a following name. The names within an object should be unique.
array
An array is an ordered collection of values. An array structure is represented as square brackets surrounding zero or more values (or elements). Elements are separated by commas. Within JSON-LD, array order is not preserved by default, unless specific markup is provided (see Lists ). This is because the basic data model of JSON-LD is a linked data graph , which is inherently unordered.
string
A string is a sequence of zero or more Unicode characters, wrapped in double quotes, using backslash escapes. A character is represented as a single character string.
number
A number is is similar to that used in most programming languages, except that the octal and hexadecimal formats are not used and that leading zeros are not allowed.
true and false
Boolean values. Values that are used to express one of two possible boolean states.
null
The use of the null value is undefined within JSON-LD. Supporting null in JSON-LD might have a number of advantages and should be evaluated. This is currently an open issue .

1.2 Syntax Tokens and Keywords

JSON-LD specifies a number of syntax tokens and keywords that are using in all algorithms described in this section:

@context
Used to set define the local context short-hand names that are used throughout a JSON-LD document. These short-hand names are called term s and help developers express specific identifiers in a compact manner. The @context keyword is described in detail in the section titled The Context .
@id
Used to uniquely identify things that are being described in the document. This keyword is described in the section titled Identifying the Subject .
@value
Sets Used to specify the active subject. data that is associated with a particular property in the graph. This keyword is described in the sections titled String Internationalization and Typed Values .
@language
Used to specify the native language for a literal. particular value. This keyword is described in the section titled String Internationalization .
@type
Used to set the data type of the active a subject or typed value . This keyword is described in the datatype of a literal. section titled Typed Values .
@value @list
Used to specify the value express an ordered set of a literal. data. This keyword is described in the section titled Lists .
:
The separator for JSON keys and values that use the prefix mechanism.

1.3 Contributing

There are a number of ways that one may participate in the development of this specification:

2. Design

This section is non-normative.

The following section outlines the design goals and rationale behind the JSON-LD markup language.

2.1 Goals and Rationale

A number of design considerations were explored during the creation of this markup language:

Simplicity
Developers need only know JSON and three two keywords ( @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.
Compatibility
The JSON-LD markup must be 100% compatible with JSON. This ensures that all of the standard JSON libraries work seamlessly with JSON-LD documents.
Expressiveness
The syntax must be able to express directed graphs, which have been proven to be able to simply express almost every real world data model.
Terseness
The JSON-LD syntax must be very terse and human readable, requiring as little effort as possible effort from the developer.
Zero Edits, most of the time
JSON-LD provides a mechanism that allows developers to specify context in a way that is out-of-band. This allows organizations that have already deployed large JSON-based infrastructure to add meaning to their JSON documents in a way that is not disruptive to their day-to-day operations and is transparent to their current customers. At times, mapping JSON to a graph representation can become difficult. In these instances, rather than having JSON-LD support esoteric markup, we chose not to support the use case and support a simplified syntax instead. So, while Zero Edits is a goal, it is not always possible without adding great complexity to the language.
One-pass Processing
JSON-LD supports one-pass processing, which results in a very small memory footprint when processing documents. For example, to expand a JSON-LD document from a compacted form, only one pass is required over the data.

2.2 Linking Data

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/",
  "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"

  "depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"

}

2.3 2.2.1 The Context

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 ]), 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 Web Vocabulary 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 , or @list keyword.

These Linked Data term s are typically collected in a context document that would look something like this:

{
  "@context": {

  "@context": 
  {

    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
    "avatar": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/avatar"

    "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/",
  "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"

  "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 avatar depiction terms map to 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 inter-operate interoperate on a site-by-site basis. Contexts may also contain datatype 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": {

  "@context": 
  {

    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
    "avatar": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/avatar"

    "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/",
  "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"

  "depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"

}

Contexts may be used at any time a JSON object is defined, and a defined. A JSON object may specify multiple contexts, to be using an array , which is processed in order, for example array-order. This is useful when an author would like to include standard prefix definitions along with use an author-specific prefix definition. 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 is termed a 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://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person",

    "http://json-ld.org/contexts/person",

    {
      "pic": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/avatar"

      "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 strives to ensure that developers don't have to change the JSON that is going into and being returned from their Web APIs. This means that developers can also specify a context for JSON data in an out-of-band fashion. This is described later in this document. JSON-LD uses a special type of machine-readable document called a Web Vocabulary vocabulary to define term s that are then used to describe concepts and "things" in the world. Typically, these Web Vocabulary 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 may have dozens of terms defined. If a developer wants to use 3-4 different vocabularies, 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.

For example, the IRI http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ specifies a Web Vocabulary vocabulary which may be represented using the foaf prefix . The foaf Web Vocabulary 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, (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 (plugging (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.

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.

2.4 2.2.2 From JSON to JSON-LD

If a set of term s such as, name , homepage , and avatar 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.

Please note that this JSON-LD document doesn't define The example above does not use the @id keyword to set the subject and will thus result in of the node being described above. This type of node is called an unlabeled or blank node. 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.

3. Basic Concepts

JSON-LD is designed to ensure that Linked Data concepts can be marked up in a way that is simple to understand and author create by Web developers. 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.

3.1 IRIs

Expressing IRI s are fundamental to Linked Data as that is how most subject s s, all properties and many object s are named. identified. IRI s can be expressed in a variety of different ways in JSON-LD.

  1. Except within a context definition, term s in the key position in a JSON object that have a mapping to an IRI or another term in the active context are expanded to an IRI by JSON-LD processors.
  2. An IRI is generated for the string value specified using @id or @type .
  3. An IRI is generated for the string value of any key for which there are coercion rules in effect that identify the value as an @id .

IRIs may be represented as an absolute IRI , an IRI that is relative to the base location of the document, a term , or a prefix :suffix construct.

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 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.

foaf:name above will automatically expand out to the IRI http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name . See Prefixes 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 represent identify that object using an IRI , but it . This facility may also is the mechanism by which be used to link a subject is defined. This is with an example of chaining object in JSON-LD, an issue using a mechanism called embedding , which is covered further in Chaining 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": {

  "@context": 
  {

    ...
    "homepage": {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id"

    "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 Processor.

3.2 Identifying the Subject

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 truely 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 key 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 create valid start generating triples. This Not specifying the @id keyword first creates a memory and complexity burden for one-pass processors.

3.3 Specifying the Type

The type of a particular subject can be specified using the @type key. keyword. Specifying the type in this way will generate a triple of the form (subject, type, type-iri). 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",
...
}

3.4 Strings

Regular text strings, also referred to as plain literal string value s, are easily expressed using regular JSON string s.

{
...
  "name": "Mark Birbeck",
...
}

3.5 String Internationalization

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 plain literal string value for 花澄 and associate the ja language code with the triple that is generated. Languages must be expressed in [ BCP47 ] format.

3.6 Typed Literals Values

A value with an associated datatype, type, also known as a typed literal value , is indicated by associating a literal value with an IRI which indicates the literal's datatype. value's type. Typed literals values may be expressed in JSON-LD in three ways:

  1. By utilizing the @type keyword when defining a term within a @context section.
  2. By utilizing the expanded form for specifying objects.
  3. By using a native JSON datatype. type.

The first example uses the @type keyword to express a typed literal: 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 literal value of 2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00 and the datatype type of http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime .

The third example uses a built-in native JSON type, a number , to express a datatype: 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 an object. a subject . Although the same keyword is used in both places, the concept of an object type and literal datatype are, in fact, 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.

3.7 Multiple Objects for a Single Property

A JSON-LD author can express multiple triples 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 typically graphs are not inherently ordered unordered data structures. To see learn more on 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"
.

3.8 Multiple Literals Values for a Single Property

Multiple literal value s may also be expressed using the expanded form for objects: 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
.

3.9 Lists

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 an a @type coercion :

{
  "@context": {
    ...
    "nick": {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/nick",
      "@list": true
    }
},
...
  "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "nick": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ],
...
}

List coercion is specified within an expanded term definition using the @list key. The value of this key, if present, must be true . This indicates that array values of keys coerced as @list are to be serialized as a List .

4. Advanced Concepts

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.

4.1 External Contexts 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 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: { , "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "avatar": "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://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person", { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" }, "http://example.org/json-ld-contexts/event" ] "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "avatar": "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 within 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" }, "": "Markus", ... "details": { "": "Acme, Ltd." } } 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 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. 4.2 Expanded Term Definition Prefixes

Within a context definition, term 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 is specified using an object having an @id key. The value of this key must be an absolute IRI . { "@context": { "name": , "homepage": , "avatar": }, "name": "Manu Sporny", "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/", "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny" } There is an open issue ( #43 ) on allowing non-terms in the key position to allow coercion to be specified for CURIEs or absolute IRIs. 4.3 Default Language JSON-LD allows a default value to use as the language for plain literal s. It is commonly the case that documents are written using a single language. As described in String Internationalization , a language-tagged literal may be specified as follows: { ... "name": { "@value": "花澄", "@language": "ja" } ... } It is also possible to apply a particular language code to all plain literals by setting the @language key in the @context : { "@context:" { "@language": "ja" }, ... "name": "occupation": ... } The example above would generate a plain literal for 花澄 and 科学者 and associate the ja language code with each literal. It is possible to override the default language by using the expanded form of a literal: { "@context:" { "@language": "ja" }, ... "name": "花澄" "occupation": { "@value": "Scientist", "@language": "en" } ... } It is also possible to override the default language and specify a plain literal by omitting the @language tag when expressing the expanded literal value: { "@context:" { "@language": "ja" }, ... "name": "花澄" "occupation": { "@value": "Ninja" } ... } 4.4 Prefixes Vocabulary terms in Linked Data documents may draw from a number of different Web vocabularies. vocabularies . At times, declaring every single term that a document uses can require the developer to declare tens, if not hundreds of potential vocabulary terms term s that may be are used across an application. This is a concern for at least three reasons; the first is the cognitive load on the developer, 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 contexts. context s that may not be easy to change after they are deployed. In order to address these issues, the concept of a prefix mechanism is introduced.

A prefix is a compact way of expressing a base IRI to for a Web Vocabulary vocabulary . 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 Web Vocabulary, vocabulary, which is identified using the IRI http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ . A developer may append any of the FOAF Vocabulary 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 IRI out of a prefix:suffix construct, 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 IRI . If the prefix is an underscore ( _ ), the IRI remains unchanged.

The ability to use prefix 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 also reduce 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 Web Vocabulary vocabulary . Without prefixes, a developer would need to keep their application context terms in lock-step with an externally defined Web Vocabulary. vocabulary. Rather, by just declaring the Web Vocabulary 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 prefix:suffix notation.

Prefixes, also known as CURIEs, are defined more formally in RDFa Core 1.1, Section 6 "CURIE Syntax 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.

4.5 4.2 IRI Expansion within Context External Contexts

To be consistent with Authors may choose to declare JSON-LD context s in general, anywhere 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 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 expected, normal substituted for the IRI expansion rules apply (see IRIs ). Within 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 definition, this can mean that terms defined within s must be overwritten on a given last-defined-overrides basis. The context may list must also be used within contain either de-referenceable IRI s or JSON Object s that context, as long as there are no circular dependencies. For example, it is common conform to use the xsd namespace when defining typed literal context s: 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://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "age": {"@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@type": },
    "homepage": {"@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id"}
  },

  "@context":
  {
    "name": "http://example.com/person#name",
    "details": "http://example.com/person#details"
  },
  "name": "Markus",

  ...
  "details":
  {
    "@context": { "name": "http://example.com/organization#name" },
    "name": "Acme, Ltd."
  }

}

In this example, the example above, the xsd name term prefix is defined, 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 a documentation about the prefix for es declared in the document. When importing a @type @context coercion value from an external JSON-LD context document, any extra information contained outside of the age @context property. 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.

Term 4.3 Default Language

JSON-LD allows a default value to use as the language for string value s s. It is commonly the case that documents are written using a single language. As described in String Internationalization , a language-tagged value may also be used when defining 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 IRI @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 another term : a value:

{
  "@context":

  "@context:"

  {
    ,
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": ,
    "age": {"@id": , "@type": xsd:integer"},
    "homepage": {"@id": , "@type": "@id"}

     "@language": "ja"

  },
  ...

...
  "name": "花澄"
  "occupation": 
  {
    "@value": "Scientist",
    "@language": "en"
  }
...

}

The only exception 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 terms use the expanded form are considered explicitly defined. The @language keyword, when used in the context , must not 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 a circular manner, meaning that the definition of term-1 context .

4.4 Expanded Term Definition

Within a context definition, term s may not depend on be defined using an expanded notation to allow for additional information associated with the definition term to be specified (see Type Coercion and Lists ).

Instead of term-2 if term-2 using a string representation of an IRI , the IRI may also depends on term-1 . For example, be specified using an object having an @id key. The value of the following context definition is illegal: @id key must be either a prefix :suffix value, an IRI . Type information may be specified

{
  "@context":
  {
    "term1": {"@id": "term2:foo"},
    "term2": {"@id": "term1:bar"}

  "@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"

}

4.6 4.5 Automatic Typing

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 literal 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 should never be converted to a language-native type

  // 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, datatype 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 datatype 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 datatype type of xsd:decimal must not be converted to a language native type.

4.7 4.6 Type Coercion

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 datatype type IRIs and must take the form of term , prefix :suffix, 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, or labeled nodes and are subject to IRI expansion. s.

Terms or prefixes 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 plain literal s, typed literal value s, IRIs and lists.

{
  "@context":
  {
     "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
     "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
     "age": ,
     "homepage": 

     "age": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@type": "xsd:integer" },
     "homepage": { "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage", "@type": "@id", "@list": true }

  },
  "name": "John Smith",
  "age": "41",
  "homepage": 

  "homepage": [ "http://personal.example.org/", "http://work.example.com/jsmith/" ]

}

The example above would generate the following turtle: Turtle:

@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
[ foaf:name "John Smith";
  foaf:age  "41"^^xsd:integer;
  foaf:homepage <http://example.org/home>

  foaf:homepage ( <http://personal.example.org/> <http://work.example.com/jsmith/> )

]
.

4.7 IRI Expansion Within a Context

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 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 { "@type": "@id" } declaration because 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": {"@id": "term2:foo"},
    "term2": {"@id": "term1:bar"}
  },
  ...
}

4.8 Chaining Embedding

Object chaining 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.

4.9 Identifying Unlabeled Nodes

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 .

4.10 Aliasing Keywords

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.

A. Markup Examples

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 RDF/XML, 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 ].

A.1 Turtle

The following are examples of representing RDF as expressed in [ TURTLE ] into JSON-LD.

A.1.1 Prefix definitions

The JSON-LD context has direct equivalents for the Turtle @prefix declaration:

@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
<http://manu.sporny.org/#me> a foaf:Person;

<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/#me",

  "@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. 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":            ,

  "@id":            ":i/public",

  "@type":          "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name":      "Manu Sporny",
  "foaf:homepage":  { "@id": ":" }
}

A.1.2 Chaining Embedding

Both Turtle and JSON-LD allow chaining embedding of objects, although Turtle only allows chaining embedding of objects which use nlank unlabeled node identifiers.

@base <http://manu.sporny.org/> . @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
<#me> a foaf:Person;

<http://manu.sporny.org/i/public> 
  a foaf:Person;

  foaf:name "Manu Sporny";
foaf:knows
[
a
foaf:Person;
foaf:name
"Gregg
Kellogg"
]
.
{
  "@context": {
    "":       "http://manu.sporny.org/",

    "foaf":   "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@id":            ":#me",

  "@id":            "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public",

  "@type":          "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name":      "Manu Sporny",
  "foaf:knows": {
    "@type":        "foaf:Person",
    "foaf:name":    "Gregg Kellogg"
  }
}

A.1.3 Lists

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")
.
{
  "@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" ] }
}

A.2 RDFa

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 is described below, however, there are other ways to mark-up this information such that the context is not repeated.

{
  "@context": { "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" },
  "@id": [
    {
      "@id": "_:bnode1",
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/bob/",
      "foaf:name": "Bob"
    },
    {
      "@id": "_:bnode2",
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/eve/",
      "foaf:name": "Eve"
    },
    {
      "@id": "_:bnode3",
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/manu/",
      "foaf:name": "Manu"
    }
  ]
}

A.3 Microformats

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://tantek.com/">Tantek Çelik</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 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"
  },
  "@id": "_:bnode1",
  "@type": "vcard",
  "url": "http://tantek.com/",
  "fn": "Tantek Çelik"
}

A.4 Microdata

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 Microdata information stays true to the desires of the microdata 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"
  }
]

B. Linked Data

The following definition for Linked Data is the one that will be used for this specification.

  1. Linked Data is a set of documents, each containing a representation of a linked data graph.
  2. A linked data graph is an unordered labeled directed graph, where nodes are subject s or object s, and edges are properties.
  3. A subject is any node in a linked data graph with at least one outgoing edge.
  4. A subject should be labeled with an IRI (an Internationalized Resource Identifier as described in [ RFC3987 ]).
  5. An object is a node in a linked data graph with at least one incoming edge.
  6. An object may be labeled with an IRI .
  7. An object may be a subject and object at the same time.
  8. A property is an edge of the linked data graph .
  9. A property should be labeled with an IRI .
  10. An IRI that is a label in a linked data graph should be dereferencable to a Linked Data document describing the labeled subject , object or property .
  11. A literal value is an object with a label that is not an IRI

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.

C. Mashing Up Vocabularies

This section is non-normative.

Developers would also benefit by allowing being able to mash other vocabularies to be used automatically with into their JSON API. JSON-LD markup. There are over 200 Web Vocabulary vocabularies Documents that are available for use on the Web today. Some of these vocabularies are: include:

You can use these vocabularies in combination, like so:

{
  "",
  "": "Manu Sporny",
  "": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"

  "@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 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",
  "myvocab:personality": "friendly"

  "sioc:avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny",
  "rdfs:comment": "Likes puppies, unicorns and rainbows."
  "myvocab:personality": "friendly"
}
The @context keyword is used to change how the JSON-LD processor evaluates key-value pairs. In this case, it was used to map one string ('myvocab') to another string, which is interpreted as a IRI . In the example above, the myvocab string is replaced with " http://example.org/myvocab# " when it is detected. In the example above, " myvocab:personality " would expand to " http://example.org/myvocab#personality ". This mechanism is a short-hand, called a Web Vocabulary prefix , and provides developers an unambiguous way to map any JSON value to RDF.

D. IANA Considerations

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.

Type name:
application
Subtype name:
ld+json
Required parameters:
None
Optional parameters:
form
Determines the serialization form for the JSON-LD document. Valid values include; compacted , expanded , and normalized . If no form is specified in an HTTP request header to a responding application, such as a Web an HTTP server, the application server may choose any form. If no form is specified for a receiving application, an HTTP client, the form must not be assumed to take any particular form.
Encoding considerations:
The same as the application/json MIME media type.
Security considerations:
Since JSON-LD is intended to be a pure data exchange format for directed graphs, the serialization should not be passed through a code execution mechanism such as JavaScript's 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.
Interoperability considerations:
Not Applicable
Published specification:
The JSON-LD specification.
Applications that use this media type:
Any programming environment that requires the exchange of directed graphs. Implementations of JSON-LD have been created for JavaScript, Python, Ruby, PHP and C++.
Additional information:
Magic number(s):
Not Applicable
File extension(s):
.jsonld
Macintosh file type code(s):
TEXT
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Intended usage:
Common
Restrictions on usage:
None
Author(s):
Manu Sporny, Gregg Kellogg, Dave Longley
Change controller:
W3C

E. Acknowledgements

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.

F. References

F.1 Normative references

[BCP47]
A. Phillips, M. Davis. Tags for Identifying Languages September 2009. IETF Best Current Practice. URL: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt
[RFC3987]
M. Dürst; M. Suignard. Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs). January 2005. Internet RFC 3987. URL: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt
[RFC4627]
D. Crockford. The application/json Media Type for JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) July 2006. Internet RFC 4627. URL: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4627.txt
[WEBIDL]
Cameron McCormack. Web IDL. 27 September 2011. W3C Working Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-WebIDL-20110927/

F.2 Informative references

[ECMA-262]
ECMAScript Language Specification. December 1999. URL: http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-262.htm
[HTML-RDFA]
Manu Sporny; et al. HTML+RDFa 04 March 2010. W3C Working Draft. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-in-html/
[JSON-LD-API]
Manu Sporny, Gregg Kellogg, Dave Longley, Eds. JSON-LD API Latest. W3C Editor's Draft. URL: http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-api/
[RDF-PRIMER]
Frank Manola; Eric Miller. RDF Primer. 10 February 2004. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-primer-20040210/
[RDFA-CORE]
Shane McCarron; et al. RDFa Core 1.1: Syntax and processing rules for embedding RDF through attributes. 15 December 2011. W3C Working Draft. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-rdfa-core-20111215
[TURTLE]
David Beckett, Tim Berners-Lee. Turtle: Terse RDF Triple Language. January 2008. W3C Team Submission. URL: http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/
[XML-NAMES]
Richard Tobin; et al. Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Third Edition). 8 December 2009. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-xml-names-20091208/