Consider sending .jsonld files with the application/ld+json content-type

[alrra]

Consider adding AddType application/ld+json jsonld, as JSON-LD (JSON for Linking Data) is in the final stages of standardization at W3C, and it seems the adoption is quite good.

Useful links:

• http://json-ld.org
• http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/
• http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/
• http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/ld+json
• https://github.com/json-ld

My question(s): Does sending .jsonld files with a different Content-Type then application/ld+json (e.g.: application/json) have any downsides ? Or to put it differently: do we really need this new Content-Type ?

(Cc: @gkellogg, @lanthaler, @msporny)

[lanthaler]

+1 Sending a JSON-LD file with the wrong media type might mean that clients can’t interpret it as JSON-LD. It is the content type who defines the semantics of a document. JSON by itself doesn’t have any. So strictly speaking, a client wouldn’t be allowed to interpret it as JSON-LD if it isn’t served with the right content type (or an HTTP Link header pointing to a context).

[msporny]

Just chiming in to agree with @lanthaler. It's considered hacky wrt. Web architecture to try to interpret documents served as one content type as another content type. Don't make the application guess, serve the document w/ the correct content type.

[alrra]

@lanthaler @msporny thanks for the comments guys, really appreciate it! (I just wanted to make sure this is worth adding, as for some file formats, web clients just ignore the Content-Type altogether).