Hi Lars, > On May 11, 2015 at 5:39 PM "Svensson, Lars" <l.svens...@dnb.de> wrote: > > > > I note in the JSON-LD spec it is stated "A profile does not change the > > semantics > > of the resource representation when processed without profile knowledge, so > > that clients both with and without knowledge of a profiled resource can > > safely > > use the same representation", which would no longer hold true if the profile > > parameter were used to negotiate which vocabulary/shape is used. > > Yes, I noted that text in RFC 6906, too, but assumed that "unchanged semantics > of the resource" meant that both representations still describe the same thing > (which they do in my case). Would a change in description vocabulary really > mean that I change the semantics of the description? If it is exactly the same information in both representations (but using a different vocabulary), then you could argue the semantics are not changed. However I would expect that one representation would contain more/less information that another and that each vocabulary might have different inference rules, so indeed then semantics would differ.
> > If so, I'd be happy to call it not a "profile", but a "shape" instead (thus > adopting the vocabulary of RDF data shapes). I don't mind what term we use, so long as it is clear to all concerned what is meant by that term :) > > Best, > > Lars John