<![CDATA[In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent:]]>In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent:

"type":"Banana"

"type":["Banana"]

"type":{"＠id":"Banana"}

"type":[{"＠id":"Banana"}]

"type":{"id":"Banana"}

"type":[{"id":"Banana"}]

"＠type":"Banana"

"＠type":["Banana"]

"＠type":{"＠id":"Banana"}

"＠type":[{"＠id":"Banana"}]

"＠type":{"id":"Banana"}

"＠type":[{"id":"Banana"}]

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/topic/ae86fd25-2bdc-4cd2-a8d2-f90ff4f615a1/in-activitypub-these-are-all-equivalentRSS for NodeThu, 14 May 2026 21:39:53 GMTThu, 14 May 2026 03:33:20 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 12:43:22 GMT]]>@trwnh @OliviaVespera

Why do you feel that the 7th & 8th cases are not "valid"?

"＠type":"Banana"

"＠type":["Banana"]

...

At the following, "type" is set as an alias for "@type":

https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams.jsonld

But, AFAICT, in JSON-LD creating an alias (such as "type") does not make the original form (such as "@type") invalid.

Are you claiming the 7th & 8th form are invalid JSON-LD?

Or, are you claiming the 7th & 8th form are valid JSON-LD, but invalid ActivityPub?

Or, something else?

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/reiver/statuses/116572985941795718https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/reiver/statuses/116572985941795718Thu, 14 May 2026 12:43:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 07:13:06 GMT]]>@steve @reiver Yup. Makes me wish we used an actual normal/canonical form that was more constrained. Even in the AS2 context I've oft thought @\type: @\id could be a mistake since {id: foo} is usually preferable; also, any non-functional property really ought to be @\container: @\set. those would be backwards-incompatible changes, though. and even if someone defined a simpler easier-to-understand profile, what's the point if people don't use it?

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571687245827455https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571687245827455Thu, 14 May 2026 07:13:06 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 06:48:51 GMT]]>@trwnh @reiver The classic example of this issue is a property like `attributedTo` or its subproperty `actor` (just two of many examples). The range is Object|Link. That means the property value could be URI, an Object, a Link or an array (set) of any combination of URIs, Objects or Links where the URI could be compacted, expanded or a CURIE.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.technoetic.com/users/steve/statuses/116571591924857752https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.technoetic.com/users/steve/statuses/116571591924857752Thu, 14 May 2026 06:48:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 05:21:27 GMT]]>@OliviaVespera @reiver It's also not correct; only the first 2 cases are valid/compliant. (If ActivityPub didn't define "type" to mean @\type, then it would be only the 7th and 8th cases in that list.)

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571248254560413https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571248254560413Thu, 14 May 2026 05:21:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 05:19:37 GMT]]>@steve @reiver So really, those 12 cases reduce to only the first 2.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571241007205737https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571241007205737Thu, 14 May 2026 05:19:37 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 05:19:04 GMT]]>@steve @reiver See https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/446 for a related issue. JSON-LD @\type IRIs get expanded against a @\vocab prefix, or if one is not present then they get expanded against the @\base, and if *that* can't be determined then they are actually not expanded.

However, you don't have to worry about cases like "＠type":{"＠id":"Banana"} because those are not valid. Per https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/#specifying-the-type you only have to worry about strings and arrays of strings.

Also AS2 compacts @\type to type.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571238864291893https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/trwnh/statuses/116571238864291893Thu, 14 May 2026 05:19:04 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 04:06:07 GMT]]>@steve

Yes, you are correct, all those are equivalent, too.

Plus any CURIE form (ex: abc:Banana).

I couldn't fit all those in the 500 character limit.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/reiver/statuses/116570951994777789https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/reiver/statuses/116570951994777789Thu, 14 May 2026 04:06:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 03:57:30 GMT]]>@reiver That's assuming "Banana" is a term defined in the JSON-LD context. Even then, the expanded "Banana" term (e.g., "https://server.example/fruits#Banana" is also valid and equivalent.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.technoetic.com/users/steve/statuses/116570918128081514https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.technoetic.com/users/steve/statuses/116570918128081514Thu, 14 May 2026 03:57:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to In ActivityPub, these are all equivalent: on Thu, 14 May 2026 03:48:44 GMT]]>@reiver That's... kinda shite.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://spacey.space/users/OliviaVespera/statuses/116570883650845596https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://spacey.space/users/OliviaVespera/statuses/116570883650845596Thu, 14 May 2026 03:48:44 GMT