JSON-LD Syntax 1.0

A Context-based JSON Serialization for Linking Data

Unofficial Draft 24 October 2011

Editor:
Manu Sporny, Digital Bazaar
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

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 IRIs, 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 light-weight 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. It is designed to be able to express key-value pairs, RDF data, RDFa [RDFA-CORE] data, Microformats [MICROFORMATS] data, and Microdata [MICRODATA]. That is, it supports every major Web-based structured data model in use today.

The syntax does not necessarily require applications to change their JSON, but allows to easily add meaning by adding context in a way that is either in-band or out-of-band. The syntax is designed to not disturb already deployed systems running on JSON, but provide a smooth upgrade path from JSON to JSON with added semantics. Finally, the format is intended to be easy to parse, efficient to generate, convertible to RDF in one pass, and require 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, for those see [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]. To understand how JSON-LD maps to RDF, it is helpful to be familiar with the basic RDF concepts [RDF-CONCEPTS].

Examples may contain references to existing vocabularies and use prefixes to refer to Web Vocabularies. The following is a list of all vocabularies and their prefix abbreviations, as used in this document:

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.
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 the local context.
@base
Used to set the base IRI for all object IRIs affected by the active context.
@vocab
Used to set the base IRI for all property IRIs affected by the active context.
@coerce
Used to specify type coercion rules.
@literal
Used to specify a literal value.
@iri
Used to specify an IRI value.
@language
Used to specify the language for a literal.
@datatype
Used to specify the datatype for a literal.
:
The separator for JSON keys and values that use the prefix mechanism.
@subject
Sets the active subject.
@type
Used to set the type of the active subject.

1.3 Contributing

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

2. Design

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 keywords 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 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 convert a JSON-LD document into an RDF document of any kind, only one pass is required over the data.

2.2 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 subjects or objects, 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 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.

2.3 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"
}

2.4 The Context

In JSON-LD, a context is used to map terms, i.e., keys and values in an JSON document, to IRIs. A term is a short word that may be expanded to an IRI. The Web uses IRIs for unambiguous identification. The idea is that these terms 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 terms to expand to IRIs so that developers don't accidentally step on each other's Web 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.

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

{
  "@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"
  }
}

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://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person",
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "avatar": "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 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 on a site-by-site basis. Contexts may also contain datatype information for certain terms 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",
    "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
    "avatar": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/avatar"
  },
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
}

Contexts may be used at any time a JSON object is defined, and a JSON object may specify multiple contexts, to be processed in order, for example to include standard prefix definitions along with a local language definition used to set the language of plain literals:

The set of contexts defined within a specific JSON Object is termed a local context. The active context refers to the accumulation of local contexts that are in scope at a specific point within the document.

{
  "@context": [
    "http://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person",
    {
      "@language": "en"
    }
  ],
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "avatar": "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 to define terms that are then used to describe concepts and "things" in the world. Typically, these Web Vocabulary documents have prefixes associated with them and contain a number of term declarations. Prefixes 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, 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 which may be represented using the foaf prefix. The foaf Web 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 (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 terms and prefixes that can be used to expand JSON keys and values into 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.

2.4.1 External Contexts

Authors may choose to declare JSON-LD contexts 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:

{
  "@context": "http://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person",
  "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", "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 contexts must be overwritten on a last-defined-overrides basis. The context list must contain either de-referenceable IRIs or JSON Objects that conform to the context syntax as described in this document.

External JSON-LD context documents may contain extra information located outside of the @context key, such as documentation about the prefixes declared in the document. 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.

2.5 From JSON to JSON-LD

If a set of terms such as, name, homepage, and avatar, 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 subject and will thus result in an unlabeled or blank node.

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 by Web developers. 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 IRIs are fundamental to Linked Data as that is how most subjects and many object are named. IRIs can be expressed in a variety of different ways in JSON-LD.

  1. In general, terms in the key position in a JSON object that have a mapping to an IRI or another key in the context are expanded to an IRI by JSON-LD processors. There are special rules for processing keys in @context and when dealing with keys that start with the @subject character.
  2. An IRI is generated for the value specified using @subject, if it is a string.
  3. An IRI is generated for the value specified using @type.
  4. An IRI is generated for the value specified using the @iri keyword.
  5. An IRI is generated when there are @coerce rules in effect for a key named @iri.

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 a term is defined within the active context:

{
  "@context": {"name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name"},
...
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
...
}

Prefixes are expanded when used in keys:

{
  "@context": {"foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"},
...
  "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny",
...
}

foaf:name above will automatically expand out to the IRI http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name.

An IRI is generated when a value is associated with a key using the @iri keyword:

{
...
  "homepage": { "@iri": "http://manu.sporny.org" }
...
}

If type coercion rules are specified in the @context for a particular vocabulary term, an IRI is generated:

{
  "@context":
  {
    ...
    "@coerce":
    {
      "@iri": "homepage"
    }
  }
...
  "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

IRIs may be represented as an absolute IRI, a term, a prefix:term construct, or as a value relative to @base or @vocab.

3.2 Identifying the Subject

To be able to externally reference nodes, it is important that each node has an unambiguous identifier. IRIs 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 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 @subject 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.

{
...
  "@subject": "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 @subject key before other key-value pairs in an object. If it isn't listed first, processors have to save each key-value pair until @subject is processed before they can create valid triples. This 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. Specifying the type in this way will generate a triple of the form (subject, type, type-iri).

To be Linked Data, types must be uniquely identified by an IRI.

{
...
  "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "@type": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person",
...
}

The example above would generate the following triple if the JSON-LD document is mapped to RDF (in N-Triples notation):

<http://example.org/people#joebob>
   <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
      <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .

3.4 Strings

Regular text strings, also referred to as plain literals, are easily expressed using regular JSON strings.

{
...
  "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": 
  {
    "@literal": "花澄",
    "@language": "ja"
  }
...
}

The example above would generate a plain literal for 花澄 and associate the ja language code with the triple that is generated. Languages must be expressed in [BCP47] format.

It is also possible to set a language to use within a @context, to allow specify a language to apply to all plain literals within the scope of the context

{
  "@context:" {
    "@language": "ja"
  },
...
  "name": "花澄"
...
}

3.6 Typed Literals

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

  1. By utilizing the @coerce keyword.
  2. By utilizing the expanded form for specifying objects.
  3. By using a native JSON datatype.

The first example uses the @coerce keyword to express a typed literal:

{
  "@context":
  {
    "modified":  "http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified",
    "dateTime": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime"
    "@coerce":
    {
      "dateTime": "modified"
    }
  }
...
  "modified": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
...
}

The second example uses the expanded form for specifying objects:

{
...
  "modified": 
  {
    "@literal": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
    "@datatype": "dateTime"
  }
...
}

Both examples above would generate an object with the literal value of 2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00 and the datatype of http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime.

The third example uses a built-in native JSON type, a number, to express a datatype:

{
...
  "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "age": 31
...
}

The example above would generate the following triple:

<http://example.org/people#joebob>
   <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age>
      "31"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer> .

3.7 Multiple Objects for a Single Property

A JSON-LD author can express multiple triples in a compact way by using arrays. 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 data structures. To see more on creating ordered collections in JSON-LD, see Lists.

{
...
  "@subject": "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 Typed Literals for a Single Property

Multiple typed literals may also be expressed using the expanded form for objects:

{
...
  "@subject": "http://example.org/articles/8",
  "modified": 
  [
    {
      "@literal": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
      "@datatype": "dateTime"
    },
    {
      "@literal": "2010-05-30T09:21:28-04:00",
      "@datatype": "dateTime"
    }
  ]
...
}

The markup shown above would generate the following triples:

<http://example.org/articles/8>
   <http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified>
      "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00"^^http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime .
<http://example.org/articles/8>
   <http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified>
      "2010-05-30T09:21:28-04:00"^^http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime .

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:

{
...
  "@subject": "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.

To preserve the order of the objects, RDF-based languages, such as [TURTLE] use the concept of an rdf:List (as described in [RDF-SCHEMA]). This uses a sequence of unlabeled nodes with properties describing a value, a null-terminated next property. Without specific syntactical support, this could be represented in JSON-LD as follows:

{
...
  "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "nick": {,
    "@first": "joe",
    "@rest": {
      "@first": "bob",
      "@rest": {
        "@first": "jaybee",
        "@rest": "@nil"
        }
      }
    }
  },
...
}

As this notation is rather unwieldy and 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:

{
...
  "@subject": "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 normalization and RDF conversion 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 @coerce term:

{
  "@context": {
    ...
    "@coerce": {
      "@list": ["foaf:nick"]
    }
  },
...
  "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "foaf:nick": ["joe", "bob", "jaybee"],
...
}

The @list keyword can be used within the @coerce section of a @context to cause value arrays to be coerced into an ordered 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 Base URI

JSON-LD allows IRIs to be specified in a relative form. For subject and object IRIs, relative IRIs are resolved against the document base using section 5.1 Establishing a Base URI of [RFC3986]. This value may be explicitly set with a context using the @base keyword.

For example, if a JSON-LD document was retrieved from http://manu.sporny.org/, relative IRIs would resolve against that URI:

{
  "@subject": "about/",
  "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny",
  "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage: ""
}

This document uses an empty @subject, which resolves to the document base. However, if the document is moved to a different location, the subject IRI would change. To prevent this, a context may have a @base mapping, to set an absolute base for the document in spite of where it actually is retrieved from. It must have a value of a simple string with the lexical form of an absolute IRI.

{
  "@context": { "@base": "http://manu.sporny.org/"},
  "@subject": "about/",
  "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny",
  "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage: ""
}

4.2 Default Vocabulary

It is often common that all types and properties come from the same vocabulary. JSON-LD provides a way to set a base URI to be used for all properties and types that aren't based on terms, prefixes or absolute IRIs. Much like the @base keyword, the @vocab keyword can be used to set a base IRI to use for all types and properties that don't otherwise resolve to an absolute IRI.

{
  "@context": { "@vocab": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/1.0/" },
  "@type": "Person",
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
}

4.3 Default Language

JSON-LD allows a default value to use as the language for plain literals. 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":
  {
    "@literal": "花澄",
    "@language": "ja"
  }
...
}

By specifying @language within a context, multiple language-tagged literals may be marked up using a simple string form:

{
  "@context": { "@language": "ja"},
...
  "name": "花澄"
...
}

4.4 Vocabulary Prefixes

Vocabulary terms in Linked Data documents may draw from a number of different Web 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 that may be used across an application. This is a concern for at least three reasons; the first is the cognitive load on the developer, the second is the serialized size of the context, the third is future-proofing application contexts. 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 a Web Vocabulary. Generally, these prefixes are used by concatenating the prefix and a suffix separated by a colon (:). The prefix is a term taken from the active context, a short string that identifies a particular Web vocabulary. For example, the prefix foaf may be used as a short hand for the Friend-of-a-Friend Web 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.

The ability to use prefixes reduces the need for developers to declare every vocabulary term that they intend to use in the JSON-LD context. This reduces document serialization size because every vocabulary term need not be declared in the context. Prefix also reduce 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. Without prefixes, a developer would need to keep their application context terms in lock-step with an externally defined Web Vocabulary. Rather, by just declaring the Web 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#"
  },
  "@subject": "http://example.org/library",
  "@type": "ex:Library",
  "ex:contains": {
    "@subject": "http://example.org/library/the-republic",
    "@type": "ex:Book",
    "dc:creator": "Plato",
    "dc:title": "The Republic",
    "ex:contains": {
      "@subject": "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 IRIs in a JSON-LD document like it is in HTML documents.

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 literals:

{
...
  // 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
  "measure:stones": { "@literal": "4.8", "@datatype": "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 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 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 of xsd:decimal must not be converted to a language native type.

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 IRIs to property types. Using type coercion, one may convert simple JSON data to properly typed RDF data.

The example below demonstrates how a JSON-LD author can coerce values to plain literals, typed literals and IRIs.

{
  "@context":
  {
     "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
     "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
     "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
     "age": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age",
     "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
     "@coerce":
     {
        "xsd:integer": "age",
        "@iri": "homepage"
     }
  },
  "name": "John Smith",
  "age": "41",
  "homepage": "http://example.org/home/"
}

The example above would generate the following triples:

_:bnode1
   <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name>
      "John Smith" .
_:bnode1
   <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age>
      "41"^^http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer .
_:bnode1
   <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage>
      <http://example.org/home/> .

The mechanism for type coercion is still being debated. It may be that the key/value positions are swapped, yielding a @context such as the following:

{
  "@context": {
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "age": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age",
    "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
    "currentProject": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/currentProject",
    "@coerce": {
      "age": "xsd:integer",
      "homepage": "@iri",
      "currentProject": ["@iri", "@list"]
     }
  },
  ...
}

An alternative is to merge the coercion into term definitions:

{
  "@context":
  {
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "age": {"@iri": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@coerce": "xsd:integer"},
    "homepage": {"@iri": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@coerce": "@iri"},
    "currentProject": {"@iri": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/currentProject", "@coerce": ["@iri", "@list"]},
  },
  ...
}

4.7 Chaining

Object chaining 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 subjects.

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.

4.8 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 @subject 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.

{
...
  "@subject": "_: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.

4.9 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": "@subject",
     "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 @subject and @type keywords have been given the aliases url and a, respectively.

5. Using JSON-LD for RDF

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 @subject and @type with the equivalent IRIs in RDF. Further information about RDF may be found in [RDF-PRIMER].

Some examples of encoding RDF into JSON-LD may be found in Appendix A. Details of transforming JSON-LD into RDF are defined in [JSON-LD-API].

A. Markup Examples

The JSON-LD markup examples below demonstrate how JSON-LD can be used to express semantic data marked up in other languages such as 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.

A.1 Turtle

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

A.1.1 Prefix and Base definitions

The JSON-LD context has direct equivalents for Turtle @base and @prefix expressions:

@base <http://manu.sporny.org/> .
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .

<#me> a foaf:Person;
  foaf:name "Manu Sporny";
  foaf:homepage <> .
{
  "@context": {
    "@base":  "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "foaf":   "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@subject":       "#me",
  "@type":          "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name":      "Manu Sporny",
  "foaf:homepage":  {"@iri": ""}
}

A.1.2 Chaining

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

@base <http://manu.sporny.org/> .
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .

<#me> a foaf:Person;
  foaf:name "Manu Sporny";
  foaf:knows [ a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Gregg Kellogg" ] .
{
  "@context": {
    "@base":  "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "foaf":   "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@subject":       "#me",
  "@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": {
    "@base":  "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "foaf":   "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@subject":       "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/"},
  "@subject": [
   {
     "@subject": "_:bnode1",
     "@type": "foaf:Person",
     "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/bob/",
     "foaf:name": "Bob"
   },
   {
     "@subject": "_:bnode2",
     "@type": "foaf:Person",
     "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/eve/",
     "foaf:name": "Eve"
   },
   {
     "@subject": "_: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.

{
  "@context":
  {
    "vcard": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#vcard",
    "url": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#url",
    "fn": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#fn",
    "@coerce": { "@iri": "url" }
  },
  "@subject": "_: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 information stays true to the desires of the Microdata community to avoid contexts and instead refer to items by their full IRI.

[
  {
    "@subject": "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"]
  },
  {
    "@subject": "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"
  },
  {
    "@subject": "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. Mashing Up Vocabularies

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

You can use these vocabularies in combination, like so:

{
  "@type": "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny",
  "foaf:homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "sioc:avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
}

Developers can also specify their own Vocabulary documents by modifying the active context in-line using the @context keyword, like so:

{
  "@context": { "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"
}

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.

C. IANA Considerations

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, framed, and normalized. Other values are allowed, but must be pre-pended with a x- string until they are clearly defined by a stable specification. If no form is specified in an HTTP request header to a responding application, such as a Web server, the application may choose any form. If no form is specified for a receiving application, the form must not be assumed to take any particular form.
It is currently being discussed to remove form=framed from this specification as there are several issues with it.
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

D. Acknowledgements

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.

E. References

E.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
[RDF-CONCEPTS]
Graham Klyne; Jeremy J. Carroll. Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax. 10 February 2004. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210
[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. 19 December 2008. W3C Working Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WebIDL-20081219

E.2 Informative references

[ECMA-262]
ECMAScript Language Specification, Third Edition. 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://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdf-interfaces/
[MICRODATA]
Ian Hickson; et al. Microdata 04 March 2010. W3C Working Draft. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata/
[MICROFORMATS]
Microformats. URL: http://microformats.org
[RDF-PRIMER]
Frank Manola; Eric Miller. RDF Primer. 10 February 2004. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-primer-20040210/
[RDF-SCHEMA]
Dan Brickley; Ramanathan V. Guha. RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. 10 February 2004. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-schema-20040210
[RDFA-CORE]
Shane McCarron; et al. RDFa Core 1.1: Syntax and processing rules for embedding RDF through attributes. 31 March JSON-LD Syntax 1.0

JSON-LD Syntax 1.0

A Context-based JSON Serialization for Linking Data

Unofficial Draft 24 October 2011

Editor:
Manu Sporny, Digital Bazaar
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.

1. Introduction

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 IRIs, 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 light-weight 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. It is designed to be able to express key-value pairs, RDF data, RDFa [RDFA-CORE] data, Microformats [MICROFORMATS] data, and Microdata [MICRODATA]. That is, it supports every major Web-based structured data model in use today.

The syntax does not necessarily require applications to change their JSON, but allows to easily add meaning by adding context in a way that is either in-band or out-of-band. The syntax is designed to not disturb already deployed systems running on JSON, but provide a smooth upgrade path from JSON to JSON with added semantics. Finally, the format is intended to be easy to parse, efficient to generate, convertible to RDF in one pass, and require 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:

  • Web developers that want to understand the design decisions and language syntax for JSON-LD.
  • Software developers that want to encode Microformats, RDFa, or Microdata in a way that is cross-language compatible via JSON.
  • Software developers that want to implement processors and APIs for JSON-LD.

This specification does not describe the processing algorithms and programming interfaces, for those see [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]. To understand how JSON-LD maps to RDF, it is helpful to be familiar with the basic RDF concepts [RDF-CONCEPTS].

Examples may contain references to existing vocabularies and use prefixes to refer to Web Vocabularies. The following is a list of all vocabularies and their prefix abbreviations, as used in this document:

  • The Dublin Core vocabulary (abbreviation: dc, e.g., dc:title)
  • The Friend of a Friend vocabulary (abbreviation: foaf, e.g., foaf:knows)
  • The RDF vocabulary (abbreviation: rdf, e.g., rdf:type)
  • The XSD vocabulary (abbreviation: xsd, e.g., xsd:integer)

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.
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 the local context.
@base
Used to set the base IRI for all object IRIs affected by the active context.
@vocab
Used to set the base IRI for all property IRIs affected by the active context.
@coerce
Used to specify type coercion rules.
@literal
Used to specify a literal value.
@iri
Used to specify an IRI value.
@language
Used to specify the language for a literal.
@datatype
Used to specify the datatype for a literal.
:
The separator for JSON keys and values that use the prefix mechanism.
@subject
Sets the active subject.
@type
Used to set the type of the active subject.

1.3 Contributing

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

  • Technical discussion typically occurs on the public mailing list: public-linked-json@w3.org
  • Public teleconferences are held on Tuesdays at 1500UTC on the second and fourth week of each month.
  • Specification bugs and issues should be reported in the issue tracker.
  • Source code for the specification can be found on Github.
  • The #json-ld IRC channel is available for real-time discussion on irc.freenode.net.

2. Design

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 keywords 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 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 convert a JSON-LD document into an RDF document of any kind, only one pass is required over the data.

2.2 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 subjects or objects, 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 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.

2.3 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"
  }

2.4 The Context

In JSON-LD, a context is used to map terms, i.e., keys and values in an JSON document, to IRIs. A term is a short word that may be expanded to an IRI. The Web uses IRIs for unambiguous identification. The idea is that these terms 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 terms to expand to IRIs so that developers don't accidentally step on each other's Web 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.

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

{
    "@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"
    }
  }

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://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person",
    "name": "Manu Sporny",
    "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "avatar": "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 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 on a site-by-site basis. Contexts may also contain datatype information for certain terms 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",
      "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
      "avatar": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/avatar"
    },
    "name": "Manu Sporny",
    "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
  }

Contexts may be used at any time a JSON object is defined, and a JSON object may specify multiple contexts, to be processed in order, for example to include standard prefix definitions along with a local language definition used to set the language of plain literals:

The set of contexts defined within a specific JSON Object is termed a local context. The active context refers to the accumulation of local contexts that are in scope at a specific point within the document.

{
    "@context": [
      "http://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person",
      {
        "@language": "en"
      }
    ],
    "name": "Manu Sporny",
    "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "avatar": "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 to define terms that are then used to describe concepts and "things" in the world. Typically, these Web Vocabulary documents have prefixes associated with them and contain a number of term declarations. Prefixes 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, 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 which may be represented using the foaf prefix. The foaf Web 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 (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 terms and prefixes that can be used to expand JSON keys and values into 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.

2.4.1 External Contexts

Authors may choose to declare JSON-LD contexts 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:

{
    "@context": "http://example.org/json-ld-contexts/person",
    "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", "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 contexts must be overwritten on a last-defined-overrides basis. The context list must contain either de-referenceable IRIs or JSON Objects that conform to the context syntax as described in this document.

External JSON-LD context documents may contain extra information located outside of the @context key, such as documentation about the prefixes declared in the document. 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.

2.5 From JSON to JSON-LD

If a set of terms such as, name, homepage, and avatar, 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 subject and will thus result in an unlabeled or blank node.

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 by Web developers. 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 IRIs are fundamental to Linked Data as that is how most subjects and many object are named. IRIs can be expressed in a variety of different ways in JSON-LD.

  1. In general, terms in the key position in a JSON object that have a mapping to an IRI or another key in the context are expanded to an IRI by JSON-LD processors. There are special rules for processing keys in @context and when dealing with keys that start with the @subject character.
  2. An IRI is generated for the value specified using @subject, if it is a string.
  3. An IRI is generated for the value specified using @type.
  4. An IRI is generated for the value specified using the @iri keyword.
  5. An IRI is generated when there are @coerce rules in effect for a key named @iri.

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 a term is defined within the active context:

{
    "@context": {"name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name"},
  ...
    "name": "Manu Sporny",
  ...
  }

Prefixes are expanded when used in keys:

{
    "@context": {"foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"},
  ...
    "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny",
  ...
  }

foaf:name above will automatically expand out to the IRI http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name.

An IRI is generated when a value is associated with a key using the @iri keyword:

{
  ...
    "homepage": { "@iri": "http://manu.sporny.org" }
  ...
  }

If type coercion rules are specified in the @context for a particular vocabulary term, an IRI is generated:

{
    "@context":
    {
      ...
      "@coerce":
      {
        "@iri": "homepage"
      }
    }
  ...
    "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

IRIs may be represented as an absolute IRI, a term, a prefix:term construct, or as a value relative to @base or @vocab.

3.2 Identifying the Subject

To be able to externally reference nodes, it is important that each node has an unambiguous identifier. IRIs 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 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 @subject 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.

{
  ...
    "@subject": "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 @subject key before other key-value pairs in an object. If it isn't listed first, processors have to save each key-value pair until @subject is processed before they can create valid triples. This 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. Specifying the type in this way will generate a triple of the form (subject, type, type-iri).

To be Linked Data, types must be uniquely identified by an IRI.

{
  ...
    "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
    "@type": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person",
  ...
  }

The example above would generate the following triple if the JSON-LD document is mapped to RDF (in N-Triples notation):

<http://example.org/people#joebob>
     <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
        <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .

3.4 Strings

Regular text strings, also referred to as plain literals, are easily expressed using regular JSON strings.

{
  ...
    "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": 
    {
      "@literal": "花澄",
      "@language": "ja"
    }
  ...
  }

The example above would generate a plain literal for 花澄 and associate the ja language code with the triple that is generated. Languages must be expressed in [BCP47] format.

It is also possible to set a language to use within a @context, to allow specify a language to apply to all plain literals within the scope of the context

{
    "@context:" {
      "@language": "ja"
    },
  ...
    "name": "花澄"
  ...
  }

3.6 Typed Literals

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

  1. By utilizing the @coerce keyword.
  2. By utilizing the expanded form for specifying objects.
  3. By using a native JSON datatype.

The first example uses the @coerce keyword to express a typed literal:

{
    "@context":
    {
      "modified":  "http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified",
      "dateTime": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime"
      "@coerce":
      {
        "dateTime": "modified"
      }
    }
  ...
    "modified": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
  ...
  }

The second example uses the expanded form for specifying objects:

{
  ...
    "modified": 
    {
      "@literal": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
      "@datatype": "dateTime"
    }
  ...
  }

Both examples above would generate an object with the literal value of 2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00 and the datatype of http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime.

The third example uses a built-in native JSON type, a number, to express a datatype:

{
  ...
    "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
    "age": 31
  ...
  }

The example above would generate the following triple:

<http://example.org/people#joebob>
     <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age>
        "31"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer> .

3.7 Multiple Objects for a Single Property

A JSON-LD author can express multiple triples in a compact way by using arrays. 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 data structures. To see more on creating ordered collections in JSON-LD, see Lists.

{
  ...
    "@subject": "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 Typed Literals for a Single Property

Multiple typed literals may also be expressed using the expanded form for objects:

{
  ...
    "@subject": "http://example.org/articles/8",
    "modified": 
    [
      {
        "@literal": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
        "@datatype": "dateTime"
      },
      {
        "@literal": "2010-05-30T09:21:28-04:00",
        "@datatype": "dateTime"
      }
    ]
  ...
  }

The markup shown above would generate the following triples:

<http://example.org/articles/8>
     <http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified>
        "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00"^^http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime .
  <http://example.org/articles/8>
     <http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified>
        "2010-05-30T09:21:28-04:00"^^http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime .

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:

{
  ...
    "@subject": "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.

To preserve the order of the objects, RDF-based languages, such as [TURTLE] use the concept of an rdf:List (as described in [RDF-SCHEMA]). This uses a sequence of unlabeled nodes with properties describing a value, a null-terminated next property. Without specific syntactical support, this could be represented in JSON-LD as follows:

{
  ...
    "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
    "nick": {,
      "@first": "joe",
      "@rest": {
        "@first": "bob",
        "@rest": {
          "@first": "jaybee",
          "@rest": "@nil"
          }
        }
      }
    },
  ...
  }

As this notation is rather unwieldy and 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:

{
  ...
    "@subject": "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 normalization and RDF conversion 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 @coerce term:

{
    "@context": {
      ...
      "@coerce": {
        "@list": ["foaf:nick"]
      }
    },
  ...
    "@subject": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
    "foaf:nick": ["joe", "bob", "jaybee"],
  ...
  }

The @list keyword can be used within the @coerce section of a @context to cause value arrays to be coerced into an ordered 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 Base URI

JSON-LD allows IRIs to be specified in a relative form. For subject and object IRIs, relative IRIs are resolved against the document base using section 5.1 Establishing a Base URI of [RFC3986]. This value may be explicitly set with a context using the @base keyword.

For example, if a JSON-LD document was retrieved from http://manu.sporny.org/, relative IRIs would resolve against that URI:

{
    "@subject": "about/",
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny",
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage: ""
  }

This document uses an empty @subject, which resolves to the document base. However, if the document is moved to a different location, the subject IRI would change. To prevent this, a context may have a @base mapping, to set an absolute base for the document in spite of where it actually is retrieved from. It must have a value of a simple string with the lexical form of an absolute IRI.

{
    "@context": { "@base": "http://manu.sporny.org/"},
    "@subject": "about/",
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": "Manu Sporny",
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage: ""
  }

4.2 Default Vocabulary

It is often common that all types and properties come from the same vocabulary. JSON-LD provides a way to set a base URI to be used for all properties and types that aren't based on terms, prefixes or absolute IRIs. Much like the @base keyword, the @vocab keyword can be used to set a base IRI to use for all types and properties that don't otherwise resolve to an absolute IRI.

{
    "@context": { "@vocab": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/1.0/" },
    "@type": "Person",
    "name": "Manu Sporny",
    "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
  }

4.3 Default Language

JSON-LD allows a default value to use as the language for plain literals. 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":
    {
      "@literal": "花澄",
      "@language": "ja"
    }
  ...
  }

By specifying @language within a context, multiple language-tagged literals may be marked up using a simple string form:

{
    "@context": { "@language": "ja"},
  ...
    "name": "花澄"
  ...
  }

4.4 Vocabulary Prefixes

Vocabulary terms in Linked Data documents may draw from a number of different Web 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 that may be used across an application. This is a concern for at least three reasons; the first is the cognitive load on the developer, the second is the serialized size of the context, the third is future-proofing application contexts. 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 a Web Vocabulary. Generally, these prefixes are used by concatenating the prefix and a suffix separated by a colon (:). The prefix is a term taken from the active context, a short string that identifies a particular Web vocabulary. For example, the prefix foaf may be used as a short hand for the Friend-of-a-Friend Web 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.

The ability to use prefixes reduces the need for developers to declare every vocabulary term that they intend to use in the JSON-LD context. This reduces document serialization size because every vocabulary term need not be declared in the context. Prefix also reduce 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. Without prefixes, a developer would need to keep their application context terms in lock-step with an externally defined Web Vocabulary. Rather, by just declaring the Web 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#"
    },
    "@subject": "http://example.org/library",
    "@type": "ex:Library",
    "ex:contains": {
      "@subject": "http://example.org/library/the-republic",
      "@type": "ex:Book",
      "dc:creator": "Plato",
      "dc:title": "The Republic",
      "ex:contains": {
        "@subject": "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 IRIs in a JSON-LD document like it is in HTML documents.

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 literals:

{
  ...
    // 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
    "measure:stones": { "@literal": "4.8", "@datatype": "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 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 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 of xsd:decimal must not be converted to a language native type.

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 IRIs to property types. Using type coercion, one may convert simple JSON data to properly typed RDF data.

The example below demonstrates how a JSON-LD author can coerce values to plain literals, typed literals and IRIs.

{
    "@context":
    {
       "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
       "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
       "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
       "age": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age",
       "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
       "@coerce":
       {
          "xsd:integer": "age",
          "@iri": "homepage"
       }
    },
    "name": "John Smith",
    "age": "41",
    "homepage": "http://example.org/home/"
  }

The example above would generate the following triples:

_:bnode1
     <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name>
        "John Smith" .
  _:bnode1
     <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age>
        "41"^^http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer .
  _:bnode1
     <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage>
        <http://example.org/home/> .

The mechanism for type coercion is still being debated. It may be that the key/value positions are swapped, yielding a @context such as the following:

{
    "@context": {
      "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
      "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
      "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
      "age": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age",
      "homepage": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
      "currentProject": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/currentProject",
      "@coerce": {
        "age": "xsd:integer",
        "homepage": "@iri",
        "currentProject": ["@iri", "@list"]
       }
    },
    ...
  }

An alternative is to merge the coercion into term definitions:

{
    "@context":
    {
      "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
      "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
      "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
      "age": {"@iri": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@coerce": "xsd:integer"},
      "homepage": {"@iri": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age", "@coerce": "@iri"},
      "currentProject": {"@iri": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/currentProject", "@coerce": ["@iri", "@list"]},
    },
    ...
  }

4.7 Chaining

Object chaining 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 subjects.

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.

4.8 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 @subject 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.

{
  ...
    "@subject": "_: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.

4.9 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": "@subject",
       "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 @subject and @type keywords have been given the aliases url and a, respectively.

5. Using JSON-LD for RDF

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 @subject and @type with the equivalent IRIs in RDF. Further information about RDF may be found in [RDF-PRIMER].

Some examples of encoding RDF into JSON-LD may be found in Appendix A. Details of transforming JSON-LD into RDF are defined in [JSON-LD-API].

A. Markup Examples

The JSON-LD markup examples below demonstrate how JSON-LD can be used to express semantic data marked up in other languages such as 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.

A.1 Turtle

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

A.1.1 Prefix and Base definitions

The JSON-LD context has direct equivalents for Turtle @base and @prefix expressions:

@base <http://manu.sporny.org/> .
  @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .

  <#me> a foaf:Person;
    foaf:name "Manu Sporny";
    foaf:homepage <> .
{
    "@context": {
      "@base":  "http://manu.sporny.org/",
      "foaf":   "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    },
    "@subject":       "#me",
    "@type":          "foaf:Person",
    "foaf:name":      "Manu Sporny",
    "foaf:homepage":  {"@iri": ""}
  }

A.1.2 Chaining

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

@base <http://manu.sporny.org/> .
  @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .

  <#me> a foaf:Person;
    foaf:name "Manu Sporny";
    foaf:knows [ a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Gregg Kellogg" ] .
{
    "@context": {
      "@base":  "http://manu.sporny.org/",
      "foaf":   "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    },
    "@subject":       "#me",
    "@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": {
      "@base":  "http://manu.sporny.org/",
      "foaf":   "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    },
    "@subject":       "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/"},
    "@subject": [
     {
       "@subject": "_:bnode1",
       "@type": "foaf:Person",
       "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/bob/",
       "foaf:name": "Bob"
     },
     {
       "@subject": "_:bnode2",
       "@type": "foaf:Person",
       "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/eve/",
       "foaf:name": "Eve"
     },
     {
       "@subject": "_: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.

{
    "@context":
    {
      "vcard": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#vcard",
      "url": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#url",
      "fn": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#fn",
      "@coerce": { "@iri": "url" }
    },
    "@subject": "_: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 information stays true to the desires of the Microdata community to avoid contexts and instead refer to items by their full IRI.

[
    {
      "@subject": "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"]
    },
    {
      "@subject": "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"
    },
    {
      "@subject": "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. Mashing Up Vocabularies

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

  • RDF - for describing information about objects and concepts on the Web.
  • RDFS - for expressing things like labels and comments.
  • XSD - for specifying basic types like strings, integers, dates and times.
  • Dublin Core - for describing creative works.
  • FOAF - for describing social networks.
  • Calendar - for specifying events.
  • SIOC - for describing discussions on blogs and websites.
  • CCrel - for describing Creative Commons and other types of licenses.
  • GEO - for describing geographic location.
  • VCard - for describing organizations and people.
  • DOAP - for describing projects.

You can use these vocabularies in combination, like so:

{
    "@type": "foaf:Person",
    "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny",
    "foaf:homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "sioc:avatar": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
  }

Developers can also specify their own Vocabulary documents by modifying the active context in-line using the @context keyword, like so:

{
    "@context": { "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"
  }

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.

C. IANA Considerations

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, framed, and normalized. Other values are allowed, but must be pre-pended with a x- string until they are clearly defined by a stable specification. If no form is specified in an HTTP request header to a responding application, such as a Web server, the application may choose any form. If no form is specified for a receiving application, the form must not be assumed to take any particular form.
It is currently being discussed to remove form=framed from this specification as there are several issues with it.
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

D. Acknowledgements

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.

E. References

E.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
[RDF-CONCEPTS]
Graham Klyne; Jeremy J. Carroll. Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax. 10 February 2004. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210
[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. 19 December 2008. W3C Working Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WebIDL-20081219

E.2 Informative references

[ECMA-262]
ECMAScript Language Specification, Third Edition. 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://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdf-interfaces/
[MICRODATA]
Ian Hickson; et al. Microdata 04 March 2010. W3C Working Draft. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata/
[MICROFORMATS]
Microformats. URL: http://microformats.org
[RDF-PRIMER]
Frank Manola; Eric Miller. RDF Primer. 10 February 2004. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-primer-20040210/
[RDF-SCHEMA]
Dan Brickley; Ramanathan V. Guha. RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. 10 February 2004. W3C Recommendation. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-schema-20040210
[RDFA-CORE]
Shane McCarron; et al. RDFa Core 1.1: Syntax and processing rules for embedding RDF through attributes. 31 March 2011. W3C Working Draft. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-rdfa-core-20110331
[RFC3986]
T. Berners-Lee; R. Fielding; L. Masinter. Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. January 2005. Internet RFC 3986. URL: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt
[TURTLE]
David Beckett, Tim Berners-Lee. Turtle: Terse RDF Triple Language. January 2008. W3C Team Submission. URL: http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/
2011. W3C Working Draft. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-rdfa-core-20110331
[RFC3986]
T. Berners-Lee; R. Fielding; L. Masinter. Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. January 2005. Internet RFC 3986. URL: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt
[TURTLE]
David Beckett, Tim Berners-Lee. Turtle: Terse RDF Triple Language. January 2008. W3C Team Submission. URL: http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/