This document is also available in this non-normative format: diff to previous version
Copyright © 2010-2013 the Contributors to the JSON-LD 1.0 Specification, published by the RDF Working Group under the W3C Community Final Specification Agreement (FSA). A human-readable summary is available.
JSON has proven to be a highly useful object serialization and messaging format. In an attempt to harmonize the representation of Linked Data in JSON, this specification outlines a common JSON representation format for expressing directed graphs; mixing both Linked Data and non-Linked Data in a single document.
This specification was published by the RDF Working Group. It is not a W3C Standard nor is it on the W3C Standards Track. Please note that under the W3C Community Final Specification Agreement (FSA) other conditions apply. Learn more about W3C Community and Business Groups.
This document has been under development for over 25 months in the JSON for Linking Data Community Group. The document has recently been transferred to the RDF Working Group for review, improvement, and publication. The specification has undergone significant development, review, and changes during the course of the last 25 months.
There are several independent interoperable implementations of this specification. There is a fairly complete test suite and a live JSON-LD editor that is capable of demonstrating the features described in this document. While development on implementations, the test suite and the live editor will continue, they are believed to be mature enough to be integrated into a non-production system at this point in time with the expectation that they could be used in a production system within the next year.
There are a number of ways that one may participate in the development of this specification:
This section is non-normative.
Linked Data is a technique for creating a network of inter-connected data across different documents and Web sites. In general, Linked Data has four properties: 1) it uses IRIs to name things; 2) it uses HTTP IRIs for those names; 3) the name IRIs, when dereferenced, provide more information about the name; and 4) the data expresses links to data on other Web sites. These properties allow data published on the Web to work much like Web pages do today. One can start at one piece of Linked Data, and follow the links to other pieces of data that are hosted on different sites across the Web.
JSON-LD is designed as a lightweight syntax to express Linked Data in JSON [RFC4627]. It is primarily intended to be a way to use Linked Data in Web-based programming environments. It is also useful when building interoperable Web services and when storing Linked Data in JSON-based storage engines. Since JSON-LD is 100% compatible with JSON the large number of JSON parsers and libraries available today can be reused. Additionally to all the features JSON provides, JSON-LD introduces:
Developers that require any of the facilities listed above or need to serialize an RDF graph or dataset [RDF-CONCEPTS] in a JSON-based syntax will find JSON-LD of interest. The syntax is designed to not disturb already deployed systems running on JSON, but provide a smooth upgrade path from JSON to JSON-LD.
This section is non-normative.
This document is a detailed specification for a serialization of Linked Data in JSON. The document is primarily intended for the following audiences:
This specification does not describe the programming interfaces for the JSON-LD Syntax. The specification that describes the programming interfaces for JSON-LD documents is the JSON-LD Application Programming Interface [JSON-LD-API].
To understand the basics in this specification you must first be familiar with JSON, which is detailed in [RFC4627].
This section is non-normative.
A number of design goals were established before the creation of this markup language:
@context
     and @id) to use the basic functionality in JSON-LD.This document uses the following terms as defined in JSON [RFC4627]. Refer to the JSON Grammar section in [RFC4627] for formal definitions.
@context where the value is null explicitly
        decouples a term's association with an IRI.
        A key-value pair in the body of a JSON-LD document whose
        value is null has the same meaning as if the key-value pair
        was not defined. If @value, @list, or
        @set is set to null in expanded form, then
        the entire JSON object is ignored.JSON-LD specifies a number of syntax tokens and keywords that are a core part of the language:
@context@context keyword is described in detail in the section titled
      5.1 The Context.@id@value@language@type@container@list@set@index@vocab@type with a common prefix
      IRI. This keyword is described in section 5.2 IRIs.@graph:For the avoidance of doubt, all keys, keywords, and values in JSON-LD are case-sensitive.
This specification describes the conformance criteria for JSON-LD documents. This criteria is relevant to authors and authoring tool implementers.
A JSON-LD document complies with this specification if it follows the normative statements in section B. JSON-LD Grammar. JSON documents can be interpreted as JSON-LD by following the normative statements in section . For convenience, normative statements for documents are often phrased as statements on the properties of the document.
The key words must, must not, required, shall, shall not, should, should not, recommended, not recommended, may, and optional in this specification have the meaning defined in [RFC2119].
JSON [RFC4627] is a lightweight, language-independent data-interchange format. It is easy to parse and easy to generate. However, it is difficult to integrate JSON from different sources as the data has just local meaning. Furthermore, JSON has no built-in support for hyperlinks - a fundamental building block on the Web. Let's look at an example that we will be using for the rest of this section:
{
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "image": "http://manu.sporny.org/images/manu.png"
}It's obvious for humans that the data is about a person whose name is "Manu Sporny"
    and that the homepage property contains the URL of that person's homepage.
    A machine doesn't have such an intuitive understanding and sometimes,
    even for humans, it is difficult to resolve ambiguities in such representations. This problem
    can be solved by using unambiguous identifiers to denote the different concepts instead of
    terms such as "name", "homepage", etc.
Linked Data, and the Web in general, uses IRIs (Internationalized Resource Identifiers as described in [RFC3987]) for unambiguous identification. The idea is to assign IRIs to 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 terms. Furthermore, developers and machines are able to use this IRI (by using a web browser, for instance) to go to the term and get a definition of what the term means.
Leveraging the well-known schema.org vocabulary, the example above could be unambiguously expressed as follows:
{
  "http://schema.org/name": "Manu Sporny",
  "http://schema.org/url": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/" },
  "http://schema.org/image": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/images/manu.png" }
}In the example above, every property is unambiguously identified by an IRI and all values
    representing IRIs are explicitly marked as such by the
    @id keyword. While this is a valid JSON-LD
    document that is very specific about its data, the document is also overly verbose and difficult
    to work with for human developers. To address this issue, JSON-LD introduces the notion
    of a context as described in the next section.
Simply speaking, a context is used to map terms, i.e., properties with associated values, to IRIs. Terms are case sensitive and any valid string that is not a reserved JSON-LD keyword can be used as a term.
For the sample document in the previous section, a context would look something like this:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "name": "http://schema.org/name",
    "image": {
      "@id": "http://schema.org/image",
      "@type": "@id"
    },
    "homepage": {
      "@id": "http://schema.org/url",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  }
}As the context above shows, the value of a term definition can either be a simple string, mapping the term to an IRI, or a JSON object.
When a JSON object is
      associated with a term, it is called an expanded term definition.
      Expanded term definitions may
      be used to associate type or
      language information with a
      term.
      The example above specifies that the values of image and
      homepage terms are IRIs.
      They also allow terms to be used for index maps
      and to specify whether array values are to be
      interpreted as sets or lists.
      Expanded term definitions may
      be defined using absolute or
      compact IRIs as keys, which is
      mainly used to associate type or language information with an
      absolute or compact IRI.
Contexts can either be directly embedded
      into the document or be referenced. Assuming the context document in the previous
      example can be retrieved at http://json-ld.org/contexts/person.jsonld,
      it can be referenced by adding a single line and allows a JSON-LD document to
      be expressed much more concisely as shown in the example below:
{
  "@context": "http://json-ld.org/contexts/person.jsonld",
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "image": "http://manu.sporny.org/images/manu.png"
}The referenced context not only specifies how the terms map to
      IRIs in the Schema.org vocabulary but also specifies that
      the values of the homepage and image property
      can be interpreted as an IRI ("@type": "@id",
      see section 5.2 IRIs for more details). This information gives the
      data global context and allows developers to re-use each other's data
      without having to agree to how their data will interoperate on a
      site-by-site basis. External JSON-LD context documents may contain extra
      information located outside of the @context key, such as
      documentation about the terms declared in the
      document. Information contained outside of the @context value
      is ignored when the document is used as an external JSON-LD context document.
Contexts may also be specified in-line. This has the advantage that JSON-LD documents can be processed even in the absence of a connection to the Web.
{
  "@context":
  {
    "name": "http://schema.org/name",
    "image": {
      "@id": "http://schema.org/image",
      "@type": "@id"
    },
    "homepage": {
      "@id": "http://schema.org/url",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "image": "http://manu.sporny.org/images/manu.png"
}IRIs (Internationalized Resource Identifiers [RFC3987]) are fundamental to Linked Data as that is how most nodes and properties are identified. In JSON-LD, IRIs may be represented as an absolute IRI or a relative IRI. An absolute IRI is defined in [RFC3987] as containing a scheme along with path and optional query and fragment segments. A relative IRI is an IRI that is relative to some other absolute IRI. In JSON-LD all relative IRIs are resolved relative to the base IRI associated with the document, which is typically the directory path containing the document.
IRIs can be expressed directly in the key position like so:
{
...
  "http://schema.org/name": "Manu Sporny",
...
}In the example above, the key http://schema.org/name
    is interpreted as an absolute IRI because it contains a colon
    (:) and the "http" prefix does not exist in
    the context.
Term-to-IRI expansion occurs if the key matches a term defined within the active context:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "name": "http://schema.org/name"
...
  },
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "status": "trollin'",
...
}JSON keys that do not expand to an absolute IRI are ignored, or removed in some cases, by the [JSON-LD-API]. However, JSON keys that do not include a mapping in the context are still considered valid expressions in JSON-LD documents—the keys just don't expand to unambiguous identifiers.
At times, all properties and types may come from the same vocabulary. JSON-LD's
    @vocab keyword allows an author to set a common prefix to be used
    for all properties and types that do not match a term or are neither
    a compact IRI nor an absolute IRI (i.e., they do
    not contain a colon).
{
  "@context": {
    "@vocab": "http://schema.org/"
  },
  "@type": "Person",
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
}An IRI is generated when a JSON object is used in
    the value position and contains an @id keyword:
{
...
  "homepage": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org" }
...
}Specifying a JSON object with an
    @id key is used to identify that node using an
    IRI. This facility may also be used to link to another
    node object using a mechanism called
    embedding, which is covered in the section titled
    6.11 Embedding.
If type coercion rules are specified in the @context for
  a particular term or property IRI, an IRI is generated:
{
  "@context":
  {
    ...
    "homepage":
    {
      "@id": "http://schema.org/homepage",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
    ...
  }
...
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
...
}In the example above, even though the value http://manu.sporny.org/
    is expressed as a JSON string, the type coercion
    rules will transform the value into an IRI when generating the
    JSON-LD graph. See 6.3 Type Coercion for more
    details about this feature.
In summary, IRIs can be expressed in a variety of different ways in JSON-LD:
@vocab mapping in the active context,
      JSON object keys without an explicit mapping
      in the active context are expanded to an IRI.@id or @type.@type key that is
      set to a value of @id or @vocab.To be able to externally reference nodes in a graph, it is important that each node has an unambiguous identifier. IRIs are a fundamental concept of Linked Data, and nodes should have a de-referenceable identifier used to name and locate them. For nodes to be truly linked, de-referencing the identifier should result in a representation of that node. Associating an IRI with a node tells an application that it can fetch the resource associated with the IRI and get back a description of the node.
JSON-LD documents may also contain descriptions of other nodes, so it is necessary to be able to uniquely identify each node so that the data is associated with the correct node in an unambiguous way.
A node is identified using the @id
    keyword:
{
  "@context":
  {
    ...
    "homepage":
    {
      "@id": "http://schema.org/homepage",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "homepage": "http://joebob.example.com/",
  ...
}The example above contains a node object identified by the IRI
    http://example.org/people#joebob.
The type of a particular node can be specified using the @type
  keyword. In Linked Data, types are uniquely
  identified with an IRI.
{
...
  "@id": "http://example.org/places#BrewEats",
  "@type": "http://schema.org/Restaurant",
...
}A node can be assigned more than one type by using an array:
{
...
  "@id": "http://example.org/places#BrewEats",
  "@type": [ "http://schema.org/Restaurant", "http://schema.org/Brewery" ],
...
}The value of a @type key may also be a term defined in the active context:
{
  "@context": {
    ...
    "Restaurant": "http://schema.org/Restaurant", 
    "Brewery": "http://schema.org/Brewery"
  }
  "@id": "http://example.org/places#BrewEats",
  "@type": ["Restaurant", "Brewery"],
  ...
}JSON-LD has a number of features that provide functionality above and beyond the core functionality described above. The following section describes this advanced functionality in more detail.
A document on the Web that defines one or more IRIs for use as properties in Linked Data is called a vocabulary. Terms in Linked Data documents may draw from a number of different vocabulariess. 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 are used across an application. This is a concern for at least two reasons: the first is the cognitive load on the developer of remembering all of the terms, and the second is the serialized size of the context if it is specified inline. In order to address these issues, the concept of a compact IRI is introduced.
    A compact IRI is a way of expressing an IRI
    using a prefix and suffix separated by a colon (:) which is
    similar to the CURIE Syntax
    in [RDFA-CORE]. The prefix is a term taken from the
    active context and is a short string identifying a
    particular IRI in a JSON-LD document.
    For example, the prefix foaf may be used as a short
    hand for the Friend-of-a-Friend vocabulary, which is identified using
    the IRI http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/. A developer may append
    any of the FOAF vocabulary terms to the end of the prefix to specify a short-hand
    version of the absolute IRI for the vocabulary term. For example,
    foaf:name would be expanded out to the IRI
    http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name. Instead of having to remember and
    type out the entire IRI, the developer can instead use the prefix in their JSON-LD markup.
  
Prefixes are expanded when the form of the value
    is a compact IRI represented as a prefix:suffix
    combination, and the prefix matches a term defined within the
    active context:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
...
  },
  "foaf:name": "Dave Longley",
...
}foaf:name above will automatically expand out to the IRI
    http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name.
Terms are interpreted as compact IRIs if they contain at least one
    colon and the first colon is not followed by two slashes (//, as in
    http://example.com). To generate the full IRI,
    the value is first split into a prefix and suffix at the first
    occurrence of a colon (:). If the active context
    contains a term mapping for prefix, an IRI is generated by
    prepending the mapped prefix to the (possibly empty) suffix
    using textual concatenation.  If no prefix mapping is defined, the value is interpreted
    as an absolute IRI. If the prefix is an underscore
    (_), the IRI remains unchanged.
  
Consider the following example:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "dc": "http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/",
    "ex": "http://example.org/vocab#"
  },
  "@id": "http://example.org/library",
  "@type": "ex:Library",
  "ex:contains":
  {
    "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic",
    "@type": "ex:Book",
    "dc:creator": "Plato",
    "dc:title": "The Republic",
    "ex:contains":
    {
      "@id": "http://example.org/library/the-republic#introduction",
      "@type": "ex:Chapter",
      "dc:description": "An introductory chapter on The Republic.",
      "dc:title": "The Introduction"
    }
  }
}In this example, two different vocabularies are referred to using prefixes.
    Those prefixes are then used as type and property values using the compact
    IRI prefix:suffix notation.
It's also possible to use compact IRIs within the context as shown in the following example:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
    "foaf:homepage": { "@type": "@id" },
    "picture": { "@id": "foaf:depiction", "@type": "@id" }
  },
  "@id": "http://me.markus-lanthaler.com/",
  "@type": "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name": "Markus Lanthaler",
  "foaf:homepage": "http://www.markus-lanthaler.com/",
  "picture": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/markuslanthaler"
}A value with an associated type, also known as a typed value, is indicated by associating a value with an IRI which indicates the value's type. Typed values may be expressed in JSON-LD in three ways:
@type keyword when defining
    a term within a @context section.The first example uses the @type keyword to associate a
type with a particular term in the @context:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "modified":
    {
      "@id": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified",
      "@type": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime"
    }
  },
...
  "@id": "http://example.com/docs/1",
  "modified": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
...
}The modified key's value above is automatically type coerced to a
dateTime value because of the information specified in the
@context. A JSON-LD processor will interpret the markup above
like so:
| Subject | Property | Value | Value Type | 
|---|---|---|---|
| http://example.com/docs/1 | http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified | 2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00 | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime | 
The second example uses the expanded form of setting the type information in the body of a JSON-LD document:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "modified":
    {
      "@id": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified"
    }
  },
...
  "modified":
  {
    "@value": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
    "@type": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime"
  }
...
}Both examples above would generate the value
  2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00 with the type
  http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime. Note that it is
  also possible to use a term or a compact IRI to
  express the value of a type.
The @type keyword is also used to associate a type
  with a node. The concept of a node type and
  a value type are different.
Generally speaking, a node type specifies the type of thing that is being described, like a person, place, event, or web page. A value type specifies the unit of measurement for a particular value, such as a date, meter, or light year.
{
...
  "@id": "http://example.org/posts#TripToWestVirginia",
  "@type": "http://schema.org/BlogPosting",   <--- This is a node type
  "modified":
  {
    "@value": "2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00",
    "@type": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime" <--- This is a value type
  }
...
}The first use of @type associates a node type
  (http://schema.org/BlogPosting) with the node,
  which is expressed using the @id keyword.
  The second use of @type associates a value type
  (http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime) with the
  value expressed using the @value keyword. As a
  general rule, when @value and @type are used in
  the same JSON object, the @type
  keyword is expressing a value type.
  Otherwise, the @type keyword is expressing a
  node type. The markup above expresses the following data:
| Subject | Property | Value | Value Type | 
|---|---|---|---|
| http://example.org/posts#TripToWestVirginia | http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type | http://schema.org/BlogPosting | - | 
| http://example.org/posts#TripToWestVirginia | http://purl.org/dc/terms/modified | 2010-05-29T14:17:39+02:00 | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime | 
JSON-LD supports the coercion of values to particular data types. Type coercion allows someone deploying JSON-LD to coerce the incoming or outgoing values to the proper data type based on a mapping of data type IRIs to terms. Using type coercion, value representation is preserved without requiring the data type to be specified with each piece of data.
Type coercion is specified within an expanded term definition
  using the @type key. The value of this key expands to an IRI.
  Alternatively, the keywords @id or @vocab may be used
  as value to indicate that within the body of a JSON-LD document, a string value of a
  term coerced to @id or @vocab is to be interpreted as an
  IRI. The difference between @id and @vocab is how values are expanded
  to absolute IRIs. @vocab first tries to expand the value
  by interpreting it as term. If no matching term is found in the
  active context, it tries to expand it as compact IRI or absolute IRI
  if there's a colon in the value; otherwise, it will expand the value using the
  active context's vocabulary mapping, if present, or by interpreting it
  as relative IRI. Values coerced to @id in contrast are expanded as
  compact IRI or absolute IRI if a colon is present; otherwise, they are interpreted
  as relative IRI.
Terms or compact IRIs used as the value of a
  @type key may be defined within the same context. This means that one may specify a
  term like xsd and then use xsd:integer within the same
  context definition.
The example below demonstrates how a JSON-LD author can coerce values to typed values, IRIs, and lists.
{
  "@context":
  {
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "age":
    {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age",
      "@type": "xsd:integer"
    },
    "homepage":
    {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
      "@type": "@id",
      "@container": "@list"
    }
  },
  "@id": "http://example.com/people#john",
  "name": "John Smith",
  "age": "41",
  "homepage":
  [
    "http://personal.example.org/",
    "http://work.example.com/jsmith/"
  ]
}The markup shown above would generate the following data. The data has no inherent order
  except for the values of the http://schema.org/homepage property
  which represent an ordered list.
| Subject | Property | Value | Value Type | 
|---|---|---|---|
| http://example.com/people#john | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name | John Smith | |
| http://example.com/people#john | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age | 41 | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer | 
| http://example.com/people#john | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage | http://personal.example.org/ | |
| http://work.example.com/jsmith/ | 
Terms may also be defined using absolute IRIs or compact IRIs. This allows coercion rules to be applied to keys which are not represented as a simple term. For example:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
    "foaf:age":
    {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age",
      "@type": "xsd:integer"
    },
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage":
    {
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  "foaf:name": "John Smith",
  "foaf:age": "41",
  "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage":
  [
    "http://personal.example.org/",
    "http://work.example.com/jsmith/"
  ]
}In this case the @id definition in the term definition is optional, but if it does exist, the compact IRI
  or IRI is treated as a term (not a prefix:suffix construct)
  so that the actual definition of a prefix becomes unnecessary. Type coercion is performed using
  the unexpanded value of the key if there is an exact match for the key in the active context.
Keys in the context are treated as terms for the purpose of
  expansion and value coercion. At times, this may result in multiple representations for the same expanded IRI.
  For example, one could specify that dog and cat both expanded to http://example.com/vocab#animal.
  Doing this could be useful for establishing different type coercion or language specification rules. It also allows a compact IRI (or even an
  absolute IRI) to be defined as something else entirely. For example, one could specify that
  the term http://example.org/zoo should expand to
  http://example.org/river, but this usage is discouraged because it would lead to a
  great deal of confusion among developers attempting to understand the JSON-LD document.
Section 5.1 The Context introduced the basics of what makes JSON-LD work. This section expands on the basic principles of the context and demonstrates how more advanced use cases can be achieved using JSON-LD.
In general, contexts may be used at any time a JSON object is defined. The only time that one cannot express a context is inside a context definition itself. For example, a JSON-LD document may use more than one context at different points in a document:
[
  {
    "@context": "http://example.org/contexts/person.jsonld",
    "name": "Manu Sporny",
    "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
    "depiction": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
  },
  {
    "@context": "http://example.org/contexts/place.jsonld",
    "name": "The Empire State Building",
    "description": "The Empire State Building is a 102-story landmark in New York City.",
    "geo": {
      "latitude": "40.75",
      "longitude": "73.98"
    }
  }
]Duplicate context terms are overridden using a last-defined-wins mechanism.
{
  "@context":
  {
    "name": "http://example.com/person#name",
    "details": "http://example.com/person#details"
  },
  "name": "Markus Lanthaler",
  ...
  "details":
  {
    "@context": {
      "name": "http://example.com/organization#name"
    },
    "name": "Graz University of Technology"
  }
}In the example above, the name term is overridden
    in the more deeply nested details structure. Note that this is
    rarely a good authoring practice and is typically used when working with
    legacy applications that depend on a specific structure of the
    JSON object. If a term is redefined within a
    context, all previous rules associated with the previous definition are
    removed. If a term is redefined to null,
    the term is effectively removed from the list of
    terms defined in the active context.
Multiple contexts may be combined using an array, which is processed
    in order. The set of contexts defined within a specific JSON object are
    referred to as local contexts. The
    active context refers to the accumulation of
    local contexts that are in scope at a
    specific point within the document. Setting a local context
    to null effectively resets the active context
    to an empty context. The following example specifies an external context
    and then layers an embedded context on top of the external context:
{
  "@context": [
    "http://json-ld.org/contexts/person.jsonld",
    {
      "pic": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction"
    }
  ],
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/",
  "pic": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/manusporny"
}It is a best practice to put the context definition at the top of the JSON-LD document.
Ordinary JSON documents can be interpreted as JSON-LD by referencing a JSON-LD
    context document in an HTTP Link Header. Doing so allows JSON to
    be unambiguously machine-readable without requiring developers to drastically
    change their markup and provides an upgrade path for existing infrastructure
    without breaking existing clients that rely on the application/json
    media type.
In order to use an external context with an ordinary JSON document, an author
    must specify an IRI to a valid JSON-LD document in
    an HTTP Link Header [RFC5988] using the http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#context
    link relation. The referenced document must have a top-level JSON object.
    The @context subtree within that object is added to the top-level
    JSON object of the referencing document. If an array
    is at the top-level of the referencing document and its items are
    JSON objects, the @context
    subtree is added to all array items. All extra information located outside
    of the @context subtree in the referenced document must be
    discarded. Effectively this means that the active context is
    initialized with the referenced external context.
The following example demonstrates the use of an external context with an ordinary JSON document:
GET /ordinary-json-document.json HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com Accept: application/ld+json,application/json,*/*;q=0.1 ==================================== HTTP/1.0 200 OK ... Content-Type: application/json Link: <http://json-ld.org/contexts/person.jsonld>; rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#context"; type="application/ld+json" { "name": "Markus Lanthaler", "homepage": "http://www.markus-lanthaler.com/", "image": "http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/markuslanthaler" }
Please note that JSON-LD documents
    served with the application/ld+json
    media type must have all context information, including references to external
    contexts, within the body of the document. Contexts linked via a
    http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#context HTTP Link Header must be
    ignored for such documents.
At times, it is important to annotate a string
    with its language. In JSON-LD this is possible in a variety of ways.
    First, it is possible to define a default language for a JSON-LD document
    by setting the @language key in the context:
{
  "@context":
  {
    ...
    "@language": "ja"
  },
  "name": "花澄",
  "occupation": "科学者"
}The example above would associate the ja language
    code with the two strings 花澄 and 科学者.
    Languages codes are defined in [BCP47].
To clear the default language for a subtree, @language can
    be set to null in a local context as follows:
{
  "@context": {
    ...
    "@language": "ja"
  },
  "name": "花澄",
  "details": {
    "@context": {
      "@language": null
    },
    "occupation": "Ninja"
  }
}Second, it is possible to associate a language with a specific term using an expanded term definition:
{
  "@context": {
    ...
    "ex": "http://example.com/vocab/",
    "@language": "ja",
    "name": { "@id": "ex:name", "@language": null },
    "occupation": { "@id": "ex:occupation" },
    "occupation_en": { "@id": "ex:occupation", "@language": "en" },
    "occupation_cs": { "@id": "ex:occupation", "@language": "cs" }
  },
  "name": "Yagyū Muneyoshi",
  "occupation": "忍者",
  "occupation_en": "Ninja",
  "occupation_cs": "Nindža",
  ...
}The example above would associate 忍者 with the specified default
    language code ja, Ninja with the language code
    en, and Nindža with the language code cs.
    The value of name, Yagyū Muneyoshi wouldn't be
    associated with any language code since @language was reset to
    null in the expanded term definition.
Language associations can only be applied to plain literal strings. Typed values or values that are subject to 6.3 Type Coercion cannot be language tagged.
Just as in the example above, systems often need to express the value of a property in multiple languages. Typically, such systems also try to ensure that developers have a programmatically easy way to navigate the data structures for the language-specific data. In this case, language maps may be utilized.
{
  "@context":
  {
    ...
    "occupation": { "@id": "ex:occupation", "@container": "@language" }
  },
  "name": "Yagyū Muneyoshi",
  "occupation":
  {
    "ja": "忍者",
    "en": "Ninja",
    "cs": "Nindža"
  }
  ...
}The example above expresses exactly the same information as the previous
    example but consolidates all values in a single property. To access the
    value in a specific language in a programming language supporting dot-notation
    accessors for object properties, a developer may use the
    property.language pattern. For example, to access the occupation
    in English, a developer would use the following code snippet:
    obj.occupation.en.
Third, it is possible to override the default language by using an expanded value:
{
  "@context": {
    ...
    "@language": "ja"
  },
  "name": "花澄",
  "occupation": {
    "@value": "Scientist",
    "@language": "en"
  }
}This makes it possible to specify a plain string by omitting the
    @language tag or setting it to null when expressing
    it using an expanded value:
{
  "@context": {
    ...
    "@language": "ja"
  },
  "name": {
    "@value": "Frank"
  },
  "occupation": {
    "@value": "Ninja",
    "@language": "en"
  },
  "speciality": "手裏剣"
}If @vocab is used but certain keys in an
    object should not be expanded using
    the vocabulary IRI, a term can be explicitly set
    to null in the context. For instance, in the
    example below the databaseId member would be ignored by a
    JSON-LD processor.
{
  "@context":
  {
     "@vocab": "http://schema.org/",
     "databaseId": null
  },
  "name": "Gregg Kellogg",
  "databaseId": "23987520"
}At times, an author may find that they need to express the same value for multiple properties. The simplest approach to accomplish this goal would be to do the following:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "title1": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/title",
    "title2": "http://schema.org/name",
    "title3": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label"
  },
  "@id": "http://example.com/book",
  "title1": "The Count of Monte Cristo",
  "title2": "The Count of Monte Cristo",
  "title3": "The Count of Monte Cristo"
}Unfortunately, the approach above produces redundant data and would become a publishing burden for large data sets. In these situations, the author may use a property generator to express a term that maps to multiple properties in the JSON-LD graph. This method can be accomplished by using the following markup pattern:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "title": { "@id": [ "http://purl.org/dc/terms/title",
                        "http://schema.org/name",
                        "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label" ] }
  },
  "@id": "http://example.com/book",
  "title": "The Count of Monte Cristo"
}While the term above is only used once outside of the @context,
the document above will be interpreted like so:
| Subject | Property | Value | 
|---|---|---|
| http://example.com/book | http://purl.org/dc/terms/title | The Count of Monte Cristo | 
| http://example.com/book | http://schema.org/name | The Count of Monte Cristo | 
| http://example.com/book | http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label | The Count of Monte Cristo | 
In general, normal IRI expansion rules apply
    anywhere an IRI is expected (see 5.2 IRIs). Within
    a context definition, this can mean that terms defined
    within the context may also be used within that context as long as
    there are no circular dependencies. For example, it is common to use
    the xsd namespace when defining typed values:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "age":
    {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/age",
      "@type": "xsd:integer"
    },
    "homepage":
    {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  ...
}In this example, the xsd term is defined
  and used as a prefix for the @type coercion
  of the age property.
Terms may also be used when defining the IRI of another term:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": "foaf:name",
    "age":
    {
      "@id": "foaf:age",
      "@type": "xsd:integer"
    },
    "homepage":
    {
      "@id": "foaf:homepage",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  ...
}Compact IRIs and IRIs may be used on the left-hand side of a term definition.
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": "foaf:name",
    "foaf:age":
    {
      "@type": "xsd:integer"
    },
    "foaf:homepage":
    {
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  ...
}
In this example, the compact IRI form is used in two different
ways.
In the first approach, foaf:age declares both the
IRI for the term (using short-form) as well as the
@type associated with the term. In the second
approach, only the @type associated with the term is
specified. The full IRI for
foaf:homepage is determined by looking up the foaf
prefix in the
context.
Absolute IRIs may also be used in the key position in a context:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
    "name": "foaf:name",
    "foaf:age":
    {
      "@id": "foaf:age",
      "@type": "xsd:integer"
    },
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage":
    {
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  ...
}In order for the absolute IRI to match above, the absolute IRI
  needs to be used in the JSON-LD document. Also note that foaf:homepage
  will not use the { "@type": "@id" } declaration because
  foaf:homepage is not the same as http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage.
  That is, terms are looked up in a context using
  direct string comparison before the prefix lookup mechanism is applied.
While it is possible to define a compact IRI, or
  an absolute IRI to expand to some other unrelated IRI
  (for example, foaf:name expanding to
  http://example.org/unrelated#species), such usage is strongly
  discouraged.
The only exception for using terms in the context is that circular definitions are not allowed. That is, a definition of term1 cannot depend on the definition of term2 if term2 also depends on term1. For example, the following context definition is illegal:
{
  "@context":
  {
    "term1": "term2:foo",
    "term2": "term1:bar"
  },
  ...
}A JSON-LD author can express multiple values in a compact way by using arrays. Since graphs do not describe ordering for links between nodes, arrays in JSON-LD do not provide an ordering of the contained elements by default. This is exactly the opposite from regular JSON arrays, which are ordered by default. For example, consider the following simple document:
{
...
  "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "nick": [ "joe", "bob", "JB" ],
...
}The markup shown above would result in the following data being generated, each relating the node to an individual value, with no inherent order:
| Subject | Property | Value | 
|---|---|---|
| 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 | JB | 
Multiple values may also be expressed using the expanded form:
{
  "@id": "http://example.org/articles/8",
  "dc:title": 
  [
    {
      "@value": "Das Kapital",
      "@language": "de"
    },
    {
      "@value": "Capital",
      "@language": "en"
    }
  ]
}The markup shown above would generate the following data, again with no inherent order:
| Subject | Property | Value | Language | 
|---|---|---|---|
| http://example.org/articles/8 | http://purl.org/dc/terms/title | Das Kapital | de | 
| http://example.org/articles/8 | http://purl.org/dc/terms/title | Capital | en | 
As the notion of ordered collections is rather important in data
  modeling, it is useful to have specific language support. In JSON-LD,
  a list may be represented using the @list keyword as follows:
{
...
  "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "foaf:nick":
  {
    "@list": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ]
  },
...
}This describes the use of this array as being ordered,
  and order is maintained when processing a document. If every use of a given multi-valued
  property is a list, this may be abbreviated by setting @container
  to @list in the context:
{
  "@context":
  {
    ...
    "nick":
    {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/nick",
      "@container": "@list"
    }
  },
...
  "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "nick": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ],
...
}List of lists are not allowed in this version of JSON-LD. This decision was made due to the extreme amount of added complexity when processing lists of lists.
While @list is used to describe ordered lists,
  the @set keyword is used to describe unordered sets.
  The use of @set in the body of a JSON-LD document
  is optimized away when processing the document, as it is just syntactic
  sugar. However, @set is helpful when used within the context
  of a document.
  Values of terms associated with a @set or @list container
  are always represented in the form of an array,
  even if there is just a single value that would otherwise be optimized to
  a non-array form in compact form (see
  6.16 Compact Document Form). This makes post-processing of
  JSON-LD documents easier as the data is always in array form, even if the
  array only contains a single value.
The use of @container in the body of a JSON-LD
  document has no meaning and is not allowed by the JSON-LD grammar
  (see B. JSON-LD Grammar).
Embedding is a JSON-LD feature that allows an author to use node objects as property values. This is a commonly used mechanism for creating a parent-child relationship between two nodes.
The example shows two nodes related by a property from the first node:
{
...
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "knows":
  {
    "@type": "Person",
    "name": "Gregg Kellogg",
  }
...
}A node object, like the one used above, may be used in any value position in the body of a JSON-LD document.
At times, it is necessary to make statements about a JSON-LD graph
    itself, rather than just a single node. This can be done by
    grouping a set of nodes using the @graph
    keyword. A developer may also name data expressed using the
    @graph keyword by pairing it with an
    @id keyword as shown in the following example:
{
  "@context": {
    "generatedAt": "http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#generatedAtTime",
    "Person": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person",
    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "knows": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows",
    "xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://example.org/graphs/73",
  "generatedAt": { "@value": "2012-04-09", "@type": "xsd:date" },
  "@graph":
  [
    {
      "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public",
      "@type": "Person",
      "name": "Manu Sporny",
      "knows": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me"
    },
    {
      "@id": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me",
      "@type": "Person",
      "name": "Gregg Kellogg",
      "knows": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public"
    }
  ]
}The example above expresses a named JSON-LD graph
    that is identified by the IRI
    http://example.org/graphs/73. That graph is composed of the
    statements about Manu and Gregg. Metadata about the graph itself is also
    expressed via the generatedAt property, which specifies when
    the graph was generated. An alternative view of the
    information above is represented in table form below:
| Graph | Subject | Property | Value | Value Type | 
|---|---|---|---|---|
| http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#generatedAtTime | 2012-04-09 | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#date | 
| http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://manu.sporny.org/i/public | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#type | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person | |
| http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://manu.sporny.org/i/public | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name | Manu Sporny | |
| http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://manu.sporny.org/i/public | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows | http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me | |
| http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#type | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person | |
| http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name | Gregg Kellogg | |
| http://example.org/graphs/73 | http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows | http://manu.sporny.org/i/public | 
When a JSON-LD document's top-level structure is an
    object that contains no other
    properties than @graph and
    optionally @context (properties that are not mapped to an
    IRI or a keyword are ignored),
    @graph is considered to express the otherwise implicit
    default graph. This mechanism can be useful when a number
    of nodes exist at the document's top level that
    share the same context. The @graph keyword
    collects such nodes in an array and allows the use of a
    shared context.
{
  "@context": ...,
  "@graph":
  [
    {
      "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public",
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "name": "Manu Sporny",
      "knows": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me"
    },
    {
      "@id": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me",
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "name": "Gregg Kellogg",
      "knows": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public"
    }
  ]
}In this case, embedding doesn't work as each node object
    references the other. This is equivalent to using multiple
    node objects in array and defining
    the @context within each node object:
[
  {
    "@context": ...,
    "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public",
    "@type": "foaf:Person",
    "name": "Manu Sporny",
    "knows": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me"
  },
  {
    "@context": ...,
    "@id": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me",
    "@type": "foaf:Person",
    "name": "Gregg Kellogg",
    "knows": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public"
  }
]At times, it becomes necessary to be able to express information without
    being able to uniquely identify the node.
    This type of node is called a blank node
    (see Section 3.4: Blank Nodes
    of [RDF-CONCEPTS]). In JSON-LD, blank node identifiers are
    automatically created if an IRI is not specified using the @id keyword.
    However, authors may provide identifiers for blank nodes
    by using the special _ (underscore) prefix. This allows one
    to reference the node locally within the document, but makes it impossible to reference
    the node from an external document. The blank node identifier is scoped
    to the document in which it is used.
{
...
  "@id": "_:foo",
...
}The example above would set the node to _:foo, which can
    then be used elsewhere in the JSON-LD document to refer back to the
    blank node. If a developer finds that they refer to the blank node
    more than once, they should consider naming the node using a dereferenceable
    IRI so that it can also be referenced from other documents.
Each of the JSON-LD keywords,
    except for @context, may be aliased to application-specific
    keywords. This feature allows legacy JSON content to be utilized
    by JSON-LD by re-using JSON keys that already exist in legacy documents.
    This feature also allows developers to design domain-specific implementations
    using only the JSON-LD context.
{
  "@context":
  {
     "url": "@id",
     "a": "@type",
     "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name"
  },
  "url": "http://example.com/about#gregg",
  "a": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person",
  "name": "Gregg Kellogg"
}In the example above, the @id and @type
    keywords have been given the aliases
    url and a, respectively.
Since keywords cannot be redefined, they can also not be aliased to
    other keywords. Every statement in the context having a keyword
    as the key (as in
    { "@type": ... }) will be
    ignored when being processed.
The JSON-LD Algorithms and API specification [JSON-LD-API]
  defines a method for expanding a JSON-LD document.
  Expansion is the process of taking a JSON-LD document and applying a
  @context such that all IRIs, types, and values
  are expanded so that the @context is no longer necessary.
For example, assume the following JSON-LD input document:
{
   "@context":
   {
      "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
      "homepage": {
        "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
        "@type": "@id"
      }
   },
   "name": "Manu Sporny",
   "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/"
}Running the JSON-LD Expansion algorithm against the JSON-LD input document provided above would result in the following output:
[
  {
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": [
      { "@value": "Manu Sporny" }
    ],
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage": [
      { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/" }
    ]
  }
]Expanded document form is useful when an application has to process input data in a deterministic form. It has been optimized to ensure that the code that developers have to write is minimized compared to the code that would have to be written to operate on 6.16 Compact Document Form.
The JSON-LD Algorithms and API specification [JSON-LD-API] defines a method for compacting a JSON-LD document. Compaction is the process of taking a JSON-LD document and applying a context such that a very compact form of the document is generated. At times, a JSON-LD document may be received that is not in its most compact form. The JSON-LD Algorithms, via an API, provides a way to compact a JSON-LD document.
For example, assume the following JSON-LD input document:
[
  {
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name": [ "Manu Sporny" ],
    "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage": [
      {
       "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/"
      }
    ]
  }
]Additionally, assume the following developer-supplied JSON-LD context:
{
  "@context": {
    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "homepage": {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  }
}Running the JSON-LD Compaction algorithm given the context supplied above against the JSON-LD input document provided above would result in the following output:
{
  "@context": {
    "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
    "homepage": {
      "@id": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage",
      "@type": "@id"
    }
  },
  "name": "Manu Sporny",
  "homepage": "http://manu.sporny.org/"
}The compaction algorithm enables a developer to map any document into an
  application-specific compacted form. The process consists of
  expanding the document (see 6.15 Expanded Document Form) and then
  using a developer-supplied context to compact the expanded document.
  While the context provided above mapped http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
  to name, it could have also mapped it to any arbitrary
  term provided by the developer. This powerful mechanism allows
  the developer to re-shape the incoming JSON data into a format that is
  optimized for their application.
Databases are typically used to make access to data more efficient. Developers often extend this sort of functionality into their application data to deliver similar performance gains. Often this data does not have any meaning from a Linked Data standpoint, but is still useful for an application.
JSON-LD introduces the notion of index maps
    that can be used to structure data into a form that is
    more efficient to access. The data indexing feature allows an author to
    structure data using a simpley key-value map where the keys do not map
    to IRIs. This enables direct access to data
    instead of having to scan an array in search of a specific item.
    In JSON-LD such data can be specified by associating the
    @index keyword with a
    @container declaration in the context:
{
  "@context":
  {
     "schema": "http://schema.org/",
     "name": "schema:name",
     "body": "schema:articleBody",
     "words": "schema:wordCount",
     "post": {
       "@id": "schema:blogPost",
       "@container": "@index"
     }
  },
  "@id": "http://example.com/",
  "@type": "schema:Blog",
  "name": "World Financial News",
  "post": {
     "en": {
       "@id": "http://example.com/posts/1/en",
       "body": "World commodities were up today with heavy trading of crude oil...",
       "words": 1539
     },
     "de": {
       "@id": "http://example.com/posts/1/de",
       "body": "Die Werte an Warenbörsen stiegen im Sog eines starken Handels von Rohöl...",
       "words": 1204
     }
  }
}In the example above, the blogPost term has
    been marked as an index map. The en,
    de, and ja keys will be ignored
    semantically, but preserved syntactically, by the JSON-LD Processor.
    This allows a developer to access the German version
    of the blogPost using the following code snippet:
    obj.blogPost.de.
The interpretation of the data above is expressed in the table below. Note how the index keys do not appear in the Linked Data below, but would continue to exist if the document were compacted or expanded (see 6.16 Compact Document Form and 6.15 Expanded Document Form) using a JSON-LD processor:
| Subject | Property | Value | 
|---|---|---|
| http://example.com/ | http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type | http://schema.org/Blog | 
| http://example.com/ | http://schema.org/name | World Financial News | 
| http://example.com/ | http://schema.org/blogPost | http://example.com/posts/1/en | 
| http://example.com/ | http://schema.org/blogPost | http://example.com/posts/1/de | 
| http://example.com/posts/1/en | http://schema.org/articleBody | World commodities were up today with heavy trading of crude oil... | 
| http://example.com/posts/1/en | http://schema.org/wordCount | 1539 | 
| http://example.com/posts/1/de | http://schema.org/articleBody | Die Werte an Warenbörsen stiegen im Sog eines starken Handels von Rohöl... | 
| http://example.com/posts/1/de | http://schema.org/wordCount | 1204 | 
JSON-LD is a serialization format for Linked Data based on JSON. It is therefore important to distinguish between the syntax, which is defined by JSON in [RFC4627], and JSON-LD's data model which is defined as follows:
_:.In contrast to the RDF data model as defined in [RDF-CONCEPTS], JSON-LD allows blank nodes as property labels and graph names. This feature is controversial in the RDF WG and may be removed in the future.
JSON-LD documents may contain data that cannot be represented by the data model defined above. Unless otherwise specified, such data is ignored when a JSON-LD document is being processed. This means, e.g., that properties which are not mapped to an IRI or blank node will be ignored.

Figure 1: An illustration of JSON-LD's data model.
This appendix restates the syntactic conventions described in the previous sections more formally.
The JSON-LD context allows keywords
  6.14 Aliasing Keywords). Whenever a keyword is
  discussed in this grammar, the statements also apply to an alias for
  that keyword. For example, if the active context
  defines the term id as an alias for @id,
  that alias may be legitimately used as a substitution for @id.
  Note that keyword aliases are not expanded during context
  processing.
A JSON-LD document must be a valid JSON document as described in [RFC4627].
A JSON-LD document must be a single node object or a JSON array containing a set of one or more node objects.
A node object represents zero or more properties of a node in the JSON-LD graph serialized by the JSON-LD document. A JSON object is a node object if it exists outside of a JSON-LD context and:
@value, @list,
    or @set keywords, and@graph and
    @context.
The properties of a node in a JSON-LD graph may be spread among different node objects within a document. When that happens, the keys of the different node objects are merged to create the properties of the resulting node.
A node object must be a JSON object. All keys which are not IRIs, compact IRIs, terms valid in the active context, or one of the following keywords must be ignored when processed:
@context,@graph,@id,@type, or@indexIf the node object contains the @context
  key, its value must be one of the following:
If the node object contains the @id key,
  its value must be an absolute IRI, a relative IRI,
  or a compact IRI (including
  blank node identifiers).
  See 5.3 Node Identifiers, 6.1 Compact IRIs,
  and 6.13 Identifying Blank Nodes for further discussion on
  @id values.
If the node object contains the @type
  key, its value must be either an absolute IRI, a
  relative IRI, a compact IRI
  (including blank node identifiers),
  a term defined in the active context expanding into an absolute IRI, or
  an array of any of these.
  See 5.4 Specifying the Type for further discussion on
  @type values.
If the node object contains the @graph
  key, its value must be
  a node object or
  an array of zero or more node objects.
  If the node object contains an @id keyword,
  its value is used as the label of a named graph.
  See 6.12 Named Graphs for further discussion on
  @graph values. As a special case, if a JSON object
  contains no keys other than @graph and @context, and the
  JSON object is the root of the JSON-LD document, the
  JSON object is not treated as a node object; this
  is used as a way of defining node
  definitions that may not form a connected graph. This allows a
  context to be defined which is shared by all of the constituent
  node objects.
If the node object contains the @index key,
  its value must be a string. See section
  6.17 Data Indexing for further discussion on @index
  values.
Keys in a node object that are not keywords must expand to an absolute IRI using the active context. The values associated with these keys must be one of the following:
A term is a short-hand string that expands to an IRI or a blank node identifier.
A term must not equal any of the JSON-LD keywords.
To avoid forward-compatibility issues, a term should not start
    with an @ character as future versions of JSON-LD may introduce
    additional keywords. Furthermore, the use of
    empty terms ("") is discouraged as not all programming languages
    are able to handle empty property names.
See 5.1 The Context and 5.2 IRIs for further discussion on mapping terms to IRIs.
A language map is used to associate a language with a value in a
  way that allows easy programmatic access. A language map may be
  used as a term value within a node object if the term is defined
  with @container set to @language. The keys of a
  language map must be lowercase [BCP47]
  strings with an associated value that is any
  of the following types:
An index map allows keys that have no semantic meaning,
  but should be preserved regardless, to be used in JSON-LD documents.
  An index map may
  be used as a term value within a node object if the
  term is defined with @container set to @index.
  The values of the members of an index map must be one
  of the following types:
See 6.17 Data Indexing for further information on this topic.
An expanded value is used to explicitly associate a type or a language with a value to create a typed value or a language-tagged string.
An expanded value must be a JSON object containing the
  @value key. It may also contain a @type,
  a @language, or an @index key but must not contain
  both a @type and a @language key at the same time.
  An expanded value must not contain keys other than
  @value, @type, @language, and
  @index. An expanded value that contains a
  @type key is called an expanded typed value.
  An expanded value that contains a @language key
  is called an expanded language-tagged string.
The value associated with the @value key must be either a
  string, number, true,
  false or null.
The value associated with the @type key must be a
  term, a compact IRI,
  an absolute IRI, a relative IRI, or null.
The value associated with the @language key must have the
  lexical form described in [BCP47], or be null.
The value associated with the @index key must be a
  string.
See 6.2 Typed Values and for more information on expanded values.
A list represents an ordered set of values. A set
  represents an unordered set of values. Unless otherwise specified,
  arrays are unordered in JSON-LD. As such, the
  @set keyword, when used in the body of a JSON-LD document,
  represents just syntactic sugar which is optimized away when processing the document.
  However, it is very helpful when used within the context of a document. Values
  of terms associated with a @set or @list container
  will always be represented in the form of an array when a document is processed -
  even if there is just a single value that would otherwise be optimized to
  a non-array form in compact document form.
  This simplifies post-processing of the data as the data is always in array form.
A list must be a JSON object that contains no other
  keys than @list, @context, and @index.
A set must be a JSON object that that contains no other
  keys than @set, @context, and @index.
  Please note that the @index key will be ignored, and thus be dropped,
  when being processed.
In both cases, the value associated with the keys @list and @set
  must be an array of any of the following:
See 6.10 Sets and Lists for further discussion on List and Set Values.
A context definition defines a local context in a node object.
A context definition must be a JSON object
  containing one or more key-value pairs. Keys must either be
  terms or @language or @vocab keywords.
If the context definition has a @language key,
  its value must have the lexical form described in [BCP47] or be null.
If the context definition has a @vocab key,
  its value must have the lexical form of absolute IRI or be null.
Term values must be either a string, null, or an expanded term definition.
An expanded term definition is used to describe the mapping between a term and its expanded identifier, as well as other properties of the value associated with the term when it is used as key in a node object.
An expanded term definition should be a JSON object
  composed of zero or more keys from @id,
  @type, @language or @container. An
  expanded term definition should not contain any other keys.
If the term definition is not null, a compact IRI,
  or an absolute IRI and the active context does not have an
  @vocab mapping, the expanded term definition must
  include the @id key.
If the expanded term definition contains the @id keyword,
  its value must be null, an absolute IRI, a blank node identifier,
  a compact IRI, a term defined in the defining context definition
  or the active context, or an array composed of any of the previous allowed values except
  null.
If the expanded term definition contains the @type keyword,
  its value must be an absolute IRI, a compact IRI, a term defined in the
  defining context definition or the active context, null, or the one of the
  keywords @id or @vocab.
If the expanded term definition contains the @language keyword,
  its value must have the lexical form described in [BCP47] or be null.
If the expanded term definition contains the @container keyword,
  its value must be either @list, @set, @language, @index, or be null.
  If the value is @language, when the term is used outside of the @context, the
  associated value must be a language map. If the value is
  @index, when the term is used outside of
  the @context, the associated value must be an
  index map.
Terms must not be used in a circular manner. That is, the definition of a term cannot depend on the definition of another term if that other term also depends on the first term.
See 5.1 The Context for further discussion on contexts.
The RDF data model, as outlined in [RDF-CONCEPTS], is an abstract syntax for representing a directed graph of information. It is a subset of JSON-LD's data model with a few additional constraints. The differences between the two data models are:
Summarized these differences mean that JSON-LD is capable of serializing any RDF graph or dataset and most, but not all, JSON-LD documents can be transformed to RDF. A complete description of the algorithms to convert from RDF to JSON-LD and from JSON-LD to RDF is included in the JSON-LD Algorithms and API specification [JSON-LD-API].
Even though JSON-LD serializes RDF datasets, it can also be used as a RDF graph source. In that case, a consumer must only use the default graph and ignore all named graphs. This allows servers to expose data in, e.g., both Turtle and JSON-LD using content negotiation.
Publishers supporting both dataset and graph syntaxes have to ensure that the primary data is stored in the default graph to enable consumers that do not support datasets to process the information.
This section is non-normative.
The JSON-LD markup examples below demonstrate how JSON-LD can be used to express semantic data marked up in other linked data formats such as Turtle, RDFa, Microformats, and Microdata. These sections are merely provided as evidence that JSON-LD is very flexible in what it can express across different Linked Data approaches.
This section is non-normative.
The following are examples of converting RDF expressed in Turtle [TURTLE-TR] into JSON-LD.
This section is non-normative.
The JSON-LD context has direct equivalents for the Turtle
  @prefix declaration:
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <http://manu.sporny.org/i/public> a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Manu Sporny"; foaf:homepage <http://manu.sporny.org/> .
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public",
  "@type": "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny",
  "foaf:homepage": { "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/" }
}JSON-LD has no equivalent for the Turtle @base
declaration, but can use a prefix such as base to encode the
information in the document.
Both Turtle and JSON-LD allow embedding, although Turtle only allows embedding of blank nodes.
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <http://manu.sporny.org/i/public> a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Manu Sporny"; foaf:knows [ a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Gregg Kellogg" ] .
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@id": "http://manu.sporny.org/i/public",
  "@type": "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name": "Manu Sporny",
  "foaf:knows":
  {
    "@type": "foaf:Person",
    "foaf:name": "Gregg Kellogg"
  }
}Both JSON-LD and Turtle can represent sequential lists of values.
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <http://example.org/people#joebob> a foaf:Person; foaf:name "Joe Bob"; foaf:nick ( "joe" "bob" "jaybee" ) .
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@id": "http://example.org/people#joebob",
  "@type": "foaf:Person",
  "foaf:name": "Joe Bob",
  "foaf:nick":
  {
    "@list": [ "joe", "bob", "jaybee" ]
  }
}The following example describes three people with their respective names and homepages in RDFa [RDFA-CORE].
<div prefix="foaf: http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"> <ul> <li typeof="foaf:Person"> <a rel="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/bob/" property="foaf:name">Bob</a> </li> <li typeof="foaf:Person"> <a rel="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/eve/" property="foaf:name">Eve</a> </li> <li typeof="foaf:Person"> <a rel="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/manu/" property="foaf:name">Manu</a> </li> </ul> </div>
An example JSON-LD implementation using a single context is described below.
{
  "@context":
  {
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
  },
  "@graph":
  [
    {
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/bob/",
      "foaf:name": "Bob"
    },
    {
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/eve/",
      "foaf:name": "Eve"
    },
    {
      "@type": "foaf:Person",
      "foaf:homepage": "http://example.com/manu/",
      "foaf:name": "Manu"
    }
  ]
}The following example uses a simple Microformats hCard example to express how Microformats [MICROFORMATS] are 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":
    {
      "@id": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#url",
      "@type": "@id"
    },
    "fn": "http://microformats.org/profile/hcard#fn"
  },
  "@type": "vcard",
  "url": "http://tantek.com/",
  "fn": "Tantek Çelik"
}The HTML Microdata [MICRODATA] example below expresses book information as a Microdata Work item.
<dl itemscope
    itemtype="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Work"
    itemid="http://purl.oreilly.com/works/45U8QJGZSQKDH8N">
 <dt>Title</dt>
 <dd><cite itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/title">Just a Geek</cite></dd>
 <dt>By</dt>
 <dd><span itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator">Wil Wheaton</span></dd>
 <dt>Format</dt>
 <dd itemprop="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#realization"
     itemscope
     itemtype="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression"
     itemid="http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596007683.BOOK">
  <link itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/type" href="http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/BOOK">
  Print
 </dd>
 <dd itemprop="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#realization"
     itemscope
     itemtype="http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression"
     itemid="http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596802189.EBOOK">
  <link itemprop="http://purl.org/dc/terms/type" href="http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/EBOOK">
  Ebook
 </dd>
</dl>Note that the JSON-LD representation of the Microdata information stays true to the desires of the Microdata community to avoid contexts and instead refer to items by their full IRI.
[
  {
    "@id": "http://purl.oreilly.com/works/45U8QJGZSQKDH8N",
    "@type": "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Work",
    "http://purl.org/dc/terms/title": "Just a Geek",
    "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator": "Whil Wheaton",
    "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#realization":
    [
      "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596007683.BOOK",
      "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596802189.EBOOK"
    ]
  },
  {
    "@id": "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596007683.BOOK",
    "@type": "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression",
    "http://purl.org/dc/terms/type": "http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/BOOK"
  },
  {
    "@id": "http://purl.oreilly.com/products/9780596802189.EBOOK",
    "@type": "http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Expression",
    "http://purl.org/dc/terms/type": "http://purl.oreilly.com/product-types/EBOOK"
  }
]This section is non-normative.
This section is included merely for standards community review and will be submitted to the Internet Engineering Steering Group if this specification becomes a W3C Recommendation.
profileA whitespace-separated list of IRIs identifying specific constraints
          or conventions that apply to a JSON-LD document. A profile must not change
          the semantics of the resource representation when processed without profile
          knowledge, so that clients both with and without knowledge of a profiled
          resource can safely use the same representation. The profile
          parameter may also be used by clients to express their preferences in the
          content negotiation process. It is recommended that profile IRIs are
          dereferenceable and provide useful documentation at that IRI. For more
          information and background please refer to [PROFILE-LINK].
This specification defines four values for the profile parameter.
          To request or specify Expanded JSON-LD document form, the IRI
          http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#expanded should be used.
          To request or specify Expanded, Flattened JSON-LD document form, the IRI
          http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#expanded-flattened should
          be used. To request or specify Compacted JSON-LD document form, the IRI
          http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#compacted should be used.
          To request or specify Compacted, Flattened JSON-LD document form, the IRI
          http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#compacted-flattened should be used.
          Please note that, according [HTTP11], the value of the profile
          parameter has to be enclosed in quotes (") because it contains
          special characters and, in some cases, whitespace.
eval()
    function to be parsed.Fragment identifiers used with application/ld+json resources may identify a node in a JSON-LD graph expressed in the resource. This idiom, which is also used in RDF [RDF-CONCEPTS], gives a simple way to "mint" new, document-local IRIs to label nodes and therefore contributes considerably to the expressive power of JSON-LD.
This section is non-normative.
The authors would like to extend a deep appreciation and the most sincere thanks to Mark Birbeck, who contributed foundational concepts to JSON-LD via his work on RDFj. JSON-LD uses a number of core concepts introduced in RDFj, such as the context as a mechanism to provide an environment for interpreting JSON data. Mark had also been very involved in the work on RDFa as well. RDFj built upon that work. JSON-LD exists because of the work and ideas he started nearly a decade ago in 2004.
A large amount of thanks goes out to the JSON-LD Community Group participants who worked through many of the technical issues on the mailing list and the weekly telecons - of special mention are François Daoust, Stéphane Corlosquet, Lin Clark, and Zdenko 'Denny' Vrandečić.
The work of David I. Lehn and Mike Johnson are appreciated for reviewing, and performing several early implementations of the specification. Thanks also to Ian Davis for this work on RDF/JSON.
Thanks to the following individuals, in order of their first name, for their input on the specification: Adrian Walker, Alexandre Passant, Andy Seaborne, Ben Adida, Blaine Cook, Bradley Allen, Brian Peterson, Bryan Thompson, Conal Tuohy, Dan Brickley, Danny Ayers, Daniel Leja, Dave Reynolds, David I. Lehn, David Wood, Dean Landolt, Ed Summers, elf Pavlik, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Erik Wilde, Fabian Christ, Jon A. Frost, Gavin Carothers, Glenn McDonald, Guus Schreiber, Henri Bergius, Jose María Alvarez Rodríguez, Ivan Herman, Jack Moffitt, Josh Mandel, KANZAKI Masahide, Kingsley Idehen, Kuno Woudt, Larry Garfield, Mark Baker, Mark MacGillivray, Marko Rodriguez, Melvin Carvalho, Nathan Rixham, Olivier Grisel, Paolo Ciccarese, Pat Hayes, Patrick Logan, Paul Kuykendall, Pelle Braendgaard, Peter Williams, Pierre-Antoine Champin, Richard Cyganiak, Roy T. Fielding, Sandro Hawke, Srecko Joksimovic, Stephane Fellah, Steve Harris, Ted Thibodeau Jr., Thomas Steiner, Tim Bray, Tom Morris, Tristan King, Sergio Fernández, Werner Wilms, and William Waites.