Add RDF Compatibility section recommending urn:solid as default vocab#6
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Adds a new subsection under Key Concepts spelling out the (previously unstated) behaviour LION processors SHOULD adopt when emitting or consuming RDF. Recommendation: when no explicit @context is supplied, processors needing RDF compatibility SHOULD assume @vocab: "urn:solid:". This gives LION docs a stable, vocab-agnostic surface for RDF interop without forcing any single upstream vocabulary on authors. Bare names like `name`/`knows` expand to urn:solid:name/urn:solid:knows, which carry owl:sameAs mappings to FOAF/Schema/dcterms/etc. via the urn-solid registry. SHOULD, not MUST: explicit @context overrides cleanly. Docs that never round-trip to RDF are unaffected. Refs: #5
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Implements the proposal in #5.
Summary
Adds a new `## RDF Compatibility` subsection to the README, between `@context` and `Spec`, spelling out the (previously unstated) behaviour LION processors SHOULD adopt when emitting or consuming RDF:
Why
Why SHOULD (not MAY / MUST)
Scope of impact
Reciprocal blessing
The urn:solid spec already includes a matching Compatibility section pointing back at LION: https://urn-solid.github.io/spec/#compatibility
Test plan