Missing @type in expanded form when an id map is used in conjunction with @type in a term definition

[keyvan-m-sadeghi]

Building on the example from the specs with 3 changes marked by // Here!:

{
  "@context": {
    "@version": 1.1,
    "schema": "http://schema.org/",
    "name": "schema:name",
    "body": "schema:articleBody",
    "words": "schema:wordCount",
    "post": {
      "@id": "schema:blogPost",
      "@container": "@id",
      "@type": "schema:BlogPosting" // Here!
    }
  },
  "@id": "http://example.com/",
  "@type": "schema:Blog",
  "name": "World Financial News",
  "post": {
    "http://example.com/posts/1/en": {
      "body": "World commodities were up today with heavy trading of crude oil...",
      "words": 1539
    },
    "http://example.com/posts/1/de": {
      "body": "Die Werte an Warenbörsen stiegen im Sog eines starken Handels von Rohöl...",
      "@type": "schema:BlogPosting",  // Here!
      "words": 1204
    },
    "http://example.com/posts/2/en": "hello" // Here!
  }
}

Open in playground

The expanded form includes the @type for the simple key-value pair "http://example.com/posts/2/en": "hello", but not for "http://example.com/posts/1/en":

[
  {
    "@id": "http://example.com/",
    "@type": [
      "http://schema.org/Blog"
    ],
    "http://schema.org/name": [
      {
        "@value": "World Financial News"
      }
    ],
    "http://schema.org/blogPost": [
      {
        "@type": [
          "http://schema.org/BlogPosting"  // Here!
        ],
        "http://schema.org/articleBody": [
          {
            "@value": "Die Werte an Warenbörsen stiegen im Sog eines starken Handels von Rohöl..."
          }
        ],
        "http://schema.org/wordCount": [
          {
            "@value": 1204
          }
        ],
        "@id": "http://example.com/posts/1/de"
      },
      {
        "http://schema.org/articleBody": [
          {
            "@value": "World commodities were up today with heavy trading of crude oil..."
          }
        ],
        "http://schema.org/wordCount": [
          {
            "@value": 1539
          }
        ],
        "@id": "http://example.com/posts/1/en"  // Not Here!
      },
      {
        "@type": "http://schema.org/BlogPosting",  // Here!
        "@value": "hello",
        "@id": "http://example.com/posts/2/en"
      }
    ]
  }
]

@type is manually added for "http://example.com/posts/1/de" for the sake of comparison, which produces the expected result IMHO.

Is this my wrong understanding or is it missing from the expansion algorithm?

Thanks in advance.

[azaroth42]

Yup, this is a common misunderstanding unfortunately. One that I have had in the past from reading the specs! You can't add an @type value into a context where the type is a class, and thus have the class added to the triples. That level of transformation of content is outside of the scope of JSON-LD in its currently chartered work.

See also: #76 and #31. Similarly #7 and #15 are transformations, though not around @type.

Thanks!

[keyvan-m-sadeghi]

Makes perfect sense. Thanks @azaroth42