the @context is not a context but an ontology

[VladimirAlexiev]

@rivettp @jgeluk This is an important bug that makes DPROD JSONLD unusable at present.

The reason for failures like #92
is that https://ekgf.github.io/dprod/dprod.jsonld is not a context per se: it's a dump of the ontology in JSONLD.

These are different things, eg compare:

• https://github.com/gs1/EPCIS/blob/master/Ontology/EPCIS.jsonld
• to https://github.com/gs1/EPCIS/blob/master/epcis-context-simple.jsonld (a simpler variant) or https://github.com/gs1/EPCIS/blob/master/epcis-context.jsonld (a more involved context)

Your examples use classes like DataProduct, DataProductAgreement. But these terms are not defined in the context, so no triples come out.

I strongly recommend to use prefixed terms like dprod:DataProduct, dprod:DataProductAgreement and NOT bare terms like DataProduct, DataProductAgreement

• We did that in EPCIS, and as a result it's harder to use EPCIS together with other JSONLD contexts.
• The EPCIS context is over-optimized, but that was necessary since EPCIS JSON doesn't have prefixes.
• EPCIS+CBV are used pretty much alone (not mixed with other data), but I think DPROD will be mixed with other data on a regular basis

[steve165]

DataProductAgreement is not part of DPROD so doesn't have a dprod prefix. It is an example created to illustrate how to use other definitions (in this case subclassing a FIBO Agreement, but should not be considered as the only option). To be explicit I assume we would just use ex:DataProductAgreement?

[VladimirAlexiev]

@steve165 yuo're right, "agreement" only appears in core-data-product-extensions/example2.jsonld:

      "@type": "ex:DataProductagreement"

[steve165]

There is a typo tho (sigh). (My typo, I should add)