Support JSON-LD @type in JSON Table Schema

[rufuspollock]

@type and/or @context + @id

@sballesteros welcome your thoughts here ...

[rufuspollock]

@ldodds wdyt?

[rufuspollock]

@ldodds @sballesteros @jbenet welcome +1 / -1 etc

[jpmckinney]

+1, I don't know what the disadvantages would be

[rufuspollock]

@type conflicts with json-ld. Maybe we want @datatype (cf #126)

[jbenet]

@rgrp It doesn't actually.

1. As msporny mentions in Reconciling with package.jsonld #110 (comment) you can rebind anything (except @context) in JSON-LD.
2. And, i think this use case is precisely what @type is made for.

[rufuspollock]

@jbenet perfect - I'd been told this recently and saw @ldodds had suggested this as an issue. Still not sure rebinding is great (i mean you can do it but is it recommended). I'd be delighted to see @type in there but just need more +1s from knowledgeable people.

[ldodds]

Perhaps it would be useful to try and define a JSON-LD context for JTS. Then type could be aliased as equivalent to @type? I've not tried that in practice though.

That keeps some background compatibility. Otherwise I'm happy to see @type.

[rufuspollock]

INVALID / DUPLICATE.

• Don't think we will use @type given "reserved" use of @ in JSON-LD
• Think we want a special type field which is now issue "Semantic" type (datatype) field in JSON Table Schema #217 so closing in favour of that.