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

IRIs for on-chain entities #77

Open
aaronc opened this issue Dec 5, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

IRIs for on-chain entities #77

aaronc opened this issue Dec 5, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@aaronc
Copy link
Member

aaronc commented Dec 5, 2023

I've seen a few different ways we refer to on-chain entities, such as using the schema IRI (ex. https://schema.regen.network#C03-CreditClass) or the app URL (ex. https://app.regen.network/project/<id>). (As a separate question I'm wondering why we have SHACL specific to credit classes, but we can leave that for another discussion.)

We should have some canonical way to refer to on-chain entities. I suggest using the same regen: IRI scheme we use for data module entries. For example, regen:ecocredit/CreditClass/C03 which derives directly from the actual on-chain entities.

For off-chain projects, https://app.regen.network/project/<id> is fine because we don't have an on-chain ID yet. But when we have an on-chain ID we should use something like regen:ecocredit/Project/<id>.

@clevinson
Copy link
Member

How do you suggest we disambiguate between regen: as the prefix used in JSON-LD as shorthand for https://schema.regen.network#, and regen: as you describe here, to use it as a specific scheme on its own?

If this is an issue, perhaps we could change our convention / shorthand in JSON-LD prefixes to rsd (short for "Regen Schema Definition", like how ssd is short for "XML Schema Definition"). Would something like this be more appropriate?

@aaronc
Copy link
Member Author

aaronc commented Dec 6, 2023

See #76

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