Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

error in frame-p010-out.jsonld #676

Closed
eroux opened this issue Sep 5, 2018 · 2 comments
Closed

error in frame-p010-out.jsonld #676

eroux opened this issue Sep 5, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@eroux
Copy link

eroux commented Sep 5, 2018

The #tp010 test of frames specifies in the manifest:

{
      "@id": "#tp010",
      "@type": ["jld:PositiveEvaluationTest", "jld:FrameTest"],
      "name": "property CURIE conflict (prune bnodes)",
      "purpose": "(Not really framing) A term looking like a CURIE becomes a CURIE when framing/compacting if defined as such in frame/context.",
      "input": "frame-0010-in.jsonld",
      "frame": "frame-0010-frame.jsonld",
      "expect": "frame-p010-out.jsonld",
      "option": {"processingMode": "json-ld-1.1", "specVersion": "json-ld-1.1"}
    }

(note the json-ld-1.1 processing mode) but expects the following output:

{
  "@context": {
    "dc": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/",
    "dc:creator": {
      "@type": "@id"
    },
    "foaf": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
    "ps": "http://purl.org/payswarm#"
  },
  "@graph": [{
    "@id": "http://example.com/asset",
    "@type": "ps:Asset",
    "dc:creator": {
      "foaf:name": "John Doe"
    }
  }]
}

which I believe is wrong due to the omit graph flag being set when the processing mode is 1.1, and should instead be:

result: {
  "@context" : {
    "dc" : "http://purl.org/dc/terms/",
    "dc:creator" : {
      "@type" : "@id"
    },
    "foaf" : "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/",
    "ps" : "http://purl.org/payswarm#"
  },
  "@id" : "http://example.com/asset",
  "@type" : "ps:Asset",
  "dc:creator" : {
    "foaf:name" : "John Doe"
  }
}

or am I missing something? The same problem appears in (at least) #tp046 and #tp050.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member

gkellogg commented Sep 5, 2018

Yes, I think you're correct, although this will now go against https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-framing.

@gkellogg
Copy link
Member

gkellogg commented Sep 5, 2018

Closed in favor of w3c/json-ld-framing#10.

@gkellogg gkellogg closed this as completed Sep 5, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants