Description
Related to json-ld-api#33, we discussed on 2018-10-05 WG call the distinction between @type
as a baked in alias for rdf:type
, and @type
as a function of the syntax for specifying the data type of the JSON object (resource vs literal, and type of literal), via the context.
There was general agreement that this was a common source of confusion, and could be ameliorated for expansion by introducing an alias (for example @datatype
) but that this would add to confusion in compaction, as it would replace @type
everywhere. A more robust change would require a change to the specification to allow either @type
or @datatype
as the way to specify the data type, however that is a significant addition that should be considered in detail.
Further, one might introduce type
: rdf:type
in a context, rather than use the more magical @type
. This approach would also impact the specifications, but would follow from the rejection of the @label
syntactic sugar in #6.