minor rewording re application of type-scoped contexts
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 1/5
- Estimated time
- Under an hour
- Newbie friendliness
- 72/100
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Clarity
- Clearly specified
- Activity status
- Stale
- Domain
- documentation
Research direction
Start in the Scoped Contexts section at the two notes immediately after note 14. Merge the notes using the proposed wording, including code point ordering, precedence for later contexts, and the behavior when @type is absent; the updated specification text should make all three points explicit.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
In Scoped Contexts, the description of Type-Scoped Contexts has two notes (right after this note):
When expanding, each value of
@typeis considered (in code point order) where that value is also a term in the active context having its own type-scoped context. If so, that the scoped context is applied to the active context.
The values of
@typeare unordered, so if multiple types are listed, the order that type-scoped contexts are applied is based on code point ordering
I suggest to merge these two notes and make it more explicit that later contexts override earlier contexts;
and add a last sentence to say explicitly that @type must be present in the JSON-LD instance for type-scoped contexts to work:
When expanding, each value of
@typeis considered. If the value is also a term in the active context having its own type-scoped context, the scoped context is applied to the active context. If multiple@typetypes are present they are applied in code point order (since the values of@typeare unordered), and terms defined in later scoped contexts take precedence. If no@typeis present then no type-scoped contexts are applied.
- Dominant language
- HTML
- Stars
- 139
- Forks
- 23
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from w3c/json-ld-syntax
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 72/100
w3c/json-ld-syntax#500 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
w3c/json-ld-syntax#499 · 1 comment · 2 reactions ·
-
editorial:class 2 spec:editorial
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 68/100
w3c/json-ld-syntax#472 · 1 reaction ·
-
w3c/json-ld-syntax#497 · 2 comments · 1 assignee ·
-
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 48/100
w3c/json-ld-syntax#496 ·
All issues in w3c/json-ld-syntax
Similar issues
-
user-reported
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 85/100
Kong/developer.konghq.com#7316 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
HarperFast/skills#96 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
infinispan/infinispan#18150 ·
-
bug triage:deciding
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 88/100
open-telemetry/otel-arrow#4132 ·
-
Ecosystem: ClawMetry — the Qwen Code reader is now free and open source (follow-up to #9294 / #9338) Opencategory/integration priority/P3 scope/documentation status/ready-for-human type/feature-request
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 84/100