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

Is the sec entry in vocab/security/vocabulary.jsonld and vocab/security/vocabulary.ttl wrong? #72

Closed
Daniel-Abrecht opened this issue Dec 24, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
before CR This issue needs to be resolved before the Candidate Recommendation phase. pr exists A pull request exists to address this issue.

Comments

@Daniel-Abrecht
Copy link

sec is set to https://w3id.org/security/v1 here, but shouldn't it be https://w3id.org/security#?

"sec": "https://w3id.org/security/v1",

@prefix sec: <https://w3id.org/security/v1> .

Because in the jsonld context in https://w3id.org/security/v1 specifies sec as https://w3id.org/security#, so sec:thing will be https://w3id.org/security#thing, whereas in the files above sec is set to https://w3id.org/security/v1, so sec:thing should end up as https://w3id.org/security/v1thing I think, which seams odd to me.

And while I'm at it, in vocabulary.ttl, there are some lines reading rdfs:range ;, they seam to trip up python rdflib when I try to parse them, so I think these empty ranges should be removed. (They don't add anything there anyway, in turtle, it's always a (subject, predicate, object) tripple, and there are no objects there, only subject & predicate, so there is no tripple)

@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Jul 4, 2023

@Daniel-Abrecht wrote:

sec is set to https://w3id.org/security/v1 here, but shouldn't it be https://w3id.org/security#?

Yes, sec is defined incorrectly in the vocabulary.yml file. Thanks for spotting the issue, PR #109 has been raised to fix the issue.

And while I'm at it, in vocabulary.ttl, there are some lines reading rdfs:range;

I just re-ran the yml2vocab command and it looks like the latest build of that tool doesn't include empty rdfs:range declarations.

So, once PR #109 is merged, it looks like we can close this issue.

@msporny msporny added pr exists A pull request exists to address this issue. before CR This issue needs to be resolved before the Candidate Recommendation phase. labels Jul 4, 2023
@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Jul 14, 2023

PR #109 has been merged, closing.

@msporny msporny closed this as completed Jul 14, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
before CR This issue needs to be resolved before the Candidate Recommendation phase. pr exists A pull request exists to address this issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants