Description
In the spec, @subject is used to denote the subject of an item, and @iri is used to denote a value which is an IRI. However, from chaining, the distinction seems to go away. For example, consider the following two graphs:
{
"@subject": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me",
"foaf:homepage":
{
"@iri": "http://greggkellogg.net/"
}
}and
{
"@subject": "http://greggkellogg.net/foaf#me",
"foaf:homepage":
{
"@subject": "http://greggkellogg.net/"
}
}From step 2.6.1 in the spec, the first use of "@subject" ("@" in that version) generates a triple in the same way that step 2.2, for "@iri", does.
We could simplify the spec by either removing "@iri", or replacing "@subject" with "@iri". Of course, using the aliasing mechanism we've discussed, the other could continue to exist as semantic sugar in the default context.
So, @subject works the same as @iri when given in an object of a property, so @iri could be considered redundant
(albeit more understandable at least for @Coerce). The question would be if @iri is sugar for objects with only that key (an no other properties), or if it works just like @subject.