YAML-LD 1.0

W3C Working Draft

More details about this document
This version:
https://www.w3.org/TR/2026/WD-yaml-ld-10-20260426/
Latest published version:
https://www.w3.org/TR/yaml-ld-10/
Latest editor's draft:
https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/
History:
https://www.w3.org/standards/history/yaml-ld-10/
Commit history
Test suite:
https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/tests/
Editors:
Anatoly Scherbakov (Invited Expert)
Gregg Kellogg (Invited Expert) (until 2025-09-06), in memoriam
Authors:
Gregg Kellogg (Invited Expert)
Anatoly Scherbakov (Invited Expert)
Roberto Polli (Par-Tec)
Feedback:
GitHub w3c/yaml-ld (pull requests, new issue, open issues)
public-linked-json@w3.org with subject line [yaml-ld-10] … message topic … (archives)

Abstract

[JSON-LD11] is a JSON-based format to serialize Linked Data [LINKED-DATA]. In recent years, [YAML] has emerged as a more concise format to represent information that had previously been serialized as [JSON], including API specifications, data schemas, and Linked Data.

This document defines YAML-LD as a set of conventions on top of YAML which specify how to serialize Linked Data as YAML based on JSON-LD syntax, semantics, and APIs.

Since YAML is more expressive than JSON, both in the available data types and in the document structure (see [RFC9512]), this document identifies constraints on YAML such that any YAML-LD document can be represented in JSON-LD.

Status of This Document

This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C standards and drafts index.

This specification was initially developed by the JSON-LD Community Group.

This document was published by the JSON-LD Working Group as a Working Draft using the Recommendation track.

Publication as a Working Draft does not imply endorsement by W3C and its Members.

This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than a work in progress.

This document was produced by a group operating under the W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent that the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.

This document is governed by the 18 August 2025 W3C Process Document.

1. Introduction

Objective
This document defines YAML-LD, a set of conventions built on top of YAML, which outlines how to serialize Linked Data as YAML based on JSON-LD syntax, semantics, and APIs. The emergence of YAML as a more concise format for representing information previously serialized as JSON, including Linked Data, has led to the development of YAML-LD.

Methods
This document defines constraints on YAML so that any YAML-LD document can be represented in JSON-LD. This is necessary because YAML is more expressive than JSON, in terms of both available data types and document structure. This document also registers the application/ld+yaml media type.

Results
This document provides a clear description of how to serialize Linked Data in YAML. It also describes the basic concepts and core requirements for implementing YAML-LD, including a comparison of JSON versus YAML, the supported YAML features, and encoding considerations.

Limitations
The YAML feature set is richer than that of JSON, and a number of YAML features are not supported in this specification. However, ground is laid for future development of a version of YAML-LD which will support those features — via the Extended YAML-LD Profile.

Conclusions
YAML-LD offers an efficient way to encode Linked Data in a variety of programming languages which can use YAML.

An introductory YAML-LD example is presented below.

Example 1: Basic YAML-LD document
"@context":
  - https://json-ld.org/contexts/dollar-convenience.jsonld
  - "@base": https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/
    rdfs: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
    schema: https://schema.org/
    license:
      "@type": "@id"

$id: https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/
rdfs:label: YAML-LD
license: https://spdx.org/licenses/W3C.html
schema:hasPart:
  - rdfs:label: Abstract
  - rdfs:label: Status of This Document
  - rdfs:label: Introduction
Editor's note
See YAML-LD description of this spec at spec.yamlld .

1.1 How to read this document

This section is non-normative.

To understand the basics of this specification, one must be familiar with the following:

This document is intended primarily for two main audiences, as described below.

1.2 Terminology

This section is non-normative.

This document uses the following terms as defined in external specifications and defines terms specific to JSON-LD.

A YAML-LD stream is a YAML stream of YAML-LD documents.

A YAML-LD document is any YAML document from which a conversion to [JSON] produces a valid JSON-LD document which can be interpreted as [LINKED-DATA].

The term media type is imported from [RFC6838].

The term JSON is imported from [JSON].

The term JSON document represents a serialization of a resource conforming to the [JSON] grammar.

The terms JSON-LD document, and value object are imported from [JSON-LD11].

The terms internal representation, and documentLoader are imported from [JSON-LD11-API].

The terms array, boolean, map, map entry, null, and string are imported from [INFRA].

The term number is imported from [ECMASCRIPT].

The terms YAML, YAML representation graph, YAML stream, YAML directive, TAG directive, YAML document, YAML sequence (either block sequence or flow sequence), YAML mapping (either block mapping or flow mapping), node, scalar, node anchor, node tags, and alias node, are imported from [YAML].

The term content negotiation is imported from [RFC9110].

The terms RDF literal, language-tagged string, datatype IRI, and language tag are imported from [RDF11-CONCEPTS].

The terms fragment and fragment identifier in this document are to be interpreted as in [URI].

The term Linked Data is imported from [LINKED-DATA].

1.3 Namespace Prefixes

This section is non-normative.

This specification makes use of the following namespace prefixes:

Prefix IRI
ex https://example.org/
i18n https://www.w3.org/ns/i18n#
rdf http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
rdfs http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
xsd http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
schema https://schema.org/
prov http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
Editor's note
See YAML-LD version of this table at namespace-prefixes.yamlld .

These are used within this document as part of a compact IRI as a shorthand for the resulting IRI, such as schema:url used to represent https://schema.org/url.

2. Conformance

As well as sections marked as non-normative, all authoring guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes in this specification are non-normative. Everything else in this specification is normative.

The key words MAY, MUST, MUST NOT, RECOMMENDED, and SHOULD in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

A YAML-LD document complies with the YAML-LD Basic profile of this specification if it follows the normative statements from this specification and can be transformed into a [JSON-LD11] representation, then back to a conforming YAML-LD document, without loss of semantic information.

For convenience, normative statements for documents are often phrased as statements on the properties of the document.

2.1 JSON-LD Version

YAML-LD supports JSON-LD 1.1 [JSON-LD11] and later.

2.2 Test Suites

To be conformant, an implementation MUST satisfy all test cases from the following test suites:

...disregarding the test cases where:

Note

Since YAML is a superset of JSON, testing a YAML-LD implementation against test cases from JSON-LD test suites should be trivial.

3. Basic Concepts

This section is non-normative.

3.1 JSON vs YAML comparison

YAML is a superset of JSON, i.e., every valid JSON document is also a valid YAML document. YAML also offers a number of extra features, chief amongst which is improved human readability due to the ability to use minimal punctuation.

YAML is more flexible than JSON, as illustrated by the comparison table below.

Features [JSON] [YAML] YAML-LD
Allowed encodings
UTF-8
UTF-16
UTF-32
Native data types
{} object
[] array
string
number
integer
floating point
bool
null
Features
Delimited strings, arrays, objects
Punctuation-free strings, arrays, objects
Custom types ✅ via tags Core Schema only
Documents per file 1 ⩾ 1 via YAML stream ⩾ 1 (depending on extractAllScripts flag, see Stream handling)
Comments Treated as Whitespace
Anchors & aliases Anchor names do not bear semantic information
Cycles ❌ Not permitted
Mapping key types string Any type representable in YAML, from strings to mappings string
Editor's note
See YAML-LD version of this table at json-vs-yaml.yamlld .

The first goal of this specification is to allow a JSON-LD document to be processed and serialized into YAML, and then back into JSON-LD, without losing any semantic information.

This is always possible because

Example: The JSON-LD document below

Example 2: Basic JSON-LD document
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",

  "@id": "https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/",
  "@type": "WebContent",
  "name": "YAML-LD",
  "author": {
    "@id": "https://www.w3.org/community/json-ld",
    "name": "JSON-LD Community Group"
  }
}

Can be serialized as YAML as follows. Note that entries starting with @ need to be enclosed in quotes because @ is a reserved character in YAML.

Example 3: Basic YAML-LD document
"@context": https://schema.org

"@id": https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/
"@type": WebContent
name: YAML-LD
author:
  "@id": https://www.w3.org/community/json-ld
  name: JSON-LD Community Group

This specification is based on YAML 1.2.2. YAML-LD processors MUST use a YAML 1.2 (or later, backward-compatible) implementation. Implementers may specify the YAML version in documents using the %YAML directive (see 8. Interoperability Considerations). See 8. Interoperability Considerations for interoperability concerns with YAML 1.1.

4. Core Requirements

4.1 Encoding

A YAML-LD document MUST be encoded in UTF-8, to ensure interoperability with [JSON]; otherwise, an invalid-encoding MUST be detected, and processing aborted.

4.2 Comments

Comments in YAML-LD documents are treated as white space.

See Interoperability considerations of "+yaml" structured syntax suffix for more details.

4.3 Anchors and Aliases

Note

In this specification, anchor means YAML's node anchor mechanism (with alias nodes, using & and * in the serialization) to reuse the same logical node by reference in the serialized graph. It is not related to HTML hyperlinks or URL fragment identifiers. See [YAML] §3.2.2.2 Anchors and Aliases and §6.9.2 Node Anchors.

Since anchor names are a serialization detail, such anchors MUST NOT be used to convey relevant information, MAY be altered when processing the document, and MAY be dropped during YAML-LD processing.

A YAML-LD document MAY contain anchored nodes and alias nodes, but its representation graph MUST NOT contain cycles; otherwise, a loading-document-failed error MUST be detected, and processing aborted.

When interpreting the document as JSON-LD, alias nodes MUST be resolved by value to their target nodes.

Note: Anchors and aliases are YAML serialization features

The YAML-LD document in the following example contains alias nodes for the {"@id": "country:US"} object:

Example 4: YAML-LD with node anchors
"@context":
  schema: https://schema.org/
  country: https://example.org/country/

"@id": https://www.w3.org/community/json-ld
"@type": schema:Organization
schema:member:
  - "@id": https://github.com/gkellogg
    "@type": schema:Person
    name: Gregg Kellogg
    country: &US
      "@id": country:US
  - "@id": https://github.com/BigBlueHat
    "@type": schema:Person
    name: Benjamin Young
    country: *US
  # - …

While the representation graph (and eventually the in-memory representation of the data structure, e.g., a Python dictionary or a Java hashmap) will still contain references between nodes, the JSON-LD serialization will not — since, by the time it is formed, all the anchors have been resolved, as shown below.

Example 5: JSON-LD resulting from YAML with node anchors
{
  "@context": {
    "schema": "https://schema.org/",
    "country": "https://example.org/country/"
  },
  "@id": "https://www.w3.org/community/json-ld",
  "@type": "schema:Organization",
  "schema:member": [
    {
      "@id": "https://github.com/gkellogg",
      "@type": "schema:Person",
      "name": "Gregg Kellogg",
      "country": {
        "@id": "country:US"
      }
    },
    {
      "@id": "https://github.com/BigBlueHat",
      "@type": "schema:Person",
      "name": "Benjamin Young",
      "country": {
        "@id": "country:US"
      }
    },
    …
  ]
}
Note: Anchors within a @context block

4.4 Mapping Key Types

Mapping key type MUST be a string. Otherwise, a processing error is raised.

4.5 Scalar Value Types

YAML-LD uses the YAML Core Schema for scalar type resolution. Float values that cannot be represented in [JSON] — specifically infinity (.inf, -.inf, +.inf) and not-a-number (.nan) — MUST cause a loading-document-failed error.

The YAML Core Schema does not define a timestamp type; scalars such as 2018-04-01 resolve to plain strings. However, many YAML libraries implement YAML 1.1 timestamp resolution by default and will silently convert such scalars to native date or datetime objects. YAML-LD processors MUST NOT perform such conversion and MUST treat these values as strings.

YAML-LD does not assign additional JSON-LD meaning to node tags beyond the scalar type resolution defined by the YAML Core Schema.

Note: Core Schema type resolution

4.6 Streams

Every YAML-LD file is a YAML-LD stream and might contain multiple YAML-LD documents, as shown in the example below.

Example 6: YAML-LD with several documents in one file
"@base": https://schema.org
"@id": https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/
"@type": WebContent
name: YAML-LD
---
"@base": https://schema.org
"@id": https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/
"@type": WebContent
name: JSON-LD

[JSON-LD11-API] defines the extractAllScripts flag, which allows to parse multiple <script> tags with YAML-LD content.

A conformant YAML-LD specification MUST take this flag into account while parsing a normal YAML-LD document.

Note: Interoperability considerations on YAML streams

For interoperability considerations on YAML streams, see the relevant section in YAML Media Type.

4.7 JSON literals

This section is non-normative.

The @json keyword from JSON-LD 1.1 defines a JSON literal as a value object with @type @json and @value containing JSON data. A processor treats such a value as a JSON literal, rather than interpreting it further as JSON-LD. Consider the following example.

Example 7: JSON literal metadata about YAML-LD specification
"@context":
  metadata: https://example.org/vocab#metadata
"@id": https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/
metadata:
  "@type": "@json"
  "@value":
    jsonLd: "1.1"
    yaml: "1.2"
    defaultProfile: "basic"
    testSuite: https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/tests/

Consider the expanded form.

Example 8: Expanded JSON literal metadata about YAML-LD specification
[
  {
    "@id": "https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/",
    "https://example.org/vocab#metadata": [
      {
        "@type": "@json",
        "@value": {
          "jsonLd": "1.1",
          "yaml": "1.2",
          "defaultProfile": "basic",
          "testSuite": "https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/tests/"
        }
      }
    ]
  }
]

Although the keyword is named @json, it does not require the value of @value to be written using JSON syntax in YAML-LD. As this example shows, the metadata value object is preserved during expansion in its JSON-LD form, — as this keyword mandates.

When it is converted to RDF, the JSON literal's lexical form is JSON text reconstructed from the internal representation.

5. YamlLdErrorCode

The YamlLdErrorCode represents the collection of valid YAML-LD error codes, which extends the JsonLdErrorCode definitions.

WebIDLenum YamlLdErrorCode {
  "invalid-encoding",
  "mapping-key-error",
  "profile-error"
};
invalid-encoding
The character encoding of an input is invalid.
mapping-key-error
A YAML mapping key was found that was not a string.
profile-error
The parsed YAML document contains features incompatible with the specified profile.

6. Security Considerations

This section is non-normative.

See Security considerations in JSON-LD 1.1 and +yaml structured syntax suffix.

7. Privacy Considerations

This section is non-normative.

See Privacy considerations in JSON-LD 1.1.

8. Interoperability Considerations

This section is non-normative.

For general interoperability considerations on the serialization of JSON documents in [YAML], see YAML and the Interoperability considerations of the +yaml structured syntax suffix.

The considerations and analysis provided here, including interoperability and security considerations, are based on the YAML 1.2.2 specification.

Many popular YAML libraries default to YAML 1.1 parsing. YAML 1.1 implementations cause interoperability issues; in particular, the so-called "Norway problem" arises because YAML 1.1 treats no, No, NO, yes, on, off, and similar values as booleans, whereas YAML 1.2 Core Schema treats them as plain strings. YAML-LD processors that use a YAML 1.1 library will fail the conformance tests and are not compliant.

9. Embedding YAML-LD in HTML Documents

YAML-LD content can be easily embedded in HTML [HTML] by placing it in a <script> element with the type attribute set to application/ld+yaml, as illustrated in an example below.

Example 9: YAML-LD document embedded in HTML
<script type="application/ld+yaml">
  "@context": https://json-ld.org/contexts/person.jsonld
  "@id": https://dbpedia.org/resource/John_Lennon
  name: John Lennon
  born: 1940-10-09
  spouse:
    - https://dbpedia.org/resource/Yoko_Ono
    - https://dbpedia.org/resource/Cynthia_Lennon
</script>

YAML syntax is indentation based. Therefore, when processing each <script> block with YAML-LD content, YAML-LD processor MUST preserve the content of the block for YAML parsing as-is, including whitespace characters.

If the YAML-LD <script> tag contains a YAML Stream with multiple YAML documents, each of these documents MUST be treated as if it was included in a separate <script> tag. See Streams for details.

A. IANA Considerations

This section has been submitted to the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) for review, approval, and registration with IANA.

This section describes the information required to register the above media type according to [RFC6838]

A.1 application/ld+yaml

Type name:
application
Subtype name:
ld+yaml
Required parameters:
N/A
Optional parameters:
profile

A non-empty list of space-separated URIs identifying specific constraints or conventions that apply to a YAML-LD document according to [RFC6906]. 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. The profile parameter MAY be used by clients to express their preferences in the content negotiation process. If the profile parameter is given, a server SHOULD return a document that honors the profiles in the list which it recognizes, and MUST ignore the profiles in the list which it does not recognize. It is RECOMMENDED that profile URIs are dereferenceable and provide useful documentation at that URI. For more information and background please refer to [RFC6906].

This specification allows the use of the profile parameters listed in and additionally defines the following:

http://www.w3.org/ns/json-ld#extended
To request or specify extended YAML-LD document form.
Editor's note
This is a placeholder for specifying something like an extended YAML-LD document form making use of YAML-specific features.

When used as a media type parameter [RFC4288] in an HTTP Accept header field [RFC9110], the value of the profile parameter MUST be enclosed in quotes (") if it contains special characters such as whitespace, which is required when multiple profile URIs are combined.

When processing the "profile" media type parameter, it is important to note that its value contains one or more URIs and not IRIs. In some cases it might therefore be necessary to convert between IRIs and URIs as specified in section 3 Relationship between IRIs and URIs of [RFC3987].

Encoding considerations:
Same as +yaml.
Security considerations:
See 6. Security Considerations.
Interoperability considerations:
See 8. Interoperability Considerations.
Published specification:
http://www.w3.org/TR/yaml-ld
Applications that use this media type:
Any programming environment that requires the exchange of directed graphs.
Additional information:
Deprecated alias names for this type:
N/A
Magic number(s):
Same as application/yaml
File extension(s):
  • .yaml
  • .yamlld
Macintosh file type code(s):
Same as application/yaml
Windows Clipboard Name:
Same as application/yaml
Person & email address to contact for further information:
W3C JSON-LD Working Group <public-json-ld-wg@w3.org>
Intended usage:
Common
Restrictions on usage:
N/A
Author(s):
Roberto Polli, Gregg Kellogg
Change controller:
W3C

B. Why are comments treated as whitespace?

This section is non-normative.

B.1 Consistency

[TURTLE] and other Linked Data serializations which support comments
do not provide a means to preserve them when processing and serializing the document in other formats
YAML
requires that parts of the document not reflected by representation graph, such as
  • comments
  • directives
  • mapping key order
  • anchor names
must not be used to convey application level information.

B.2 Predictability

Theoretically, we could try harvesting YAML comments into JSON-LD documents. We would define a specific predicate, like https://json-ld.org/yaml-ld/comment, and convert every # My comment fragment into a {"yaml-ld:comment": "My comment"} piece of the JSON-LD document.

This would, however, have the following impacts on implementations:

C. Acknowledgements

This section is non-normative.

C.1 In Memoriam

Gregg Kellogg was a central figure in the story of JSON-LD and YAML-LD. He worked tirelessly on JSON-LD and many other specifications for more than a decade, right up until his death on September 6th, 2025. Gregg's passion for solving hard problems with finesse was only exceeded by his willingness to collaborate with and encourage others in reaching that destination. The JSON-LD and broader Linked Data communities will be forever grateful for Gregg's consistent, careful, and kindly delivered contributions during their most formative years.

C.2 Contributions

The editors would especially like to thank the following individuals for making significant contributions to the authoring and editing of this specification:

D. References

D.1 Normative references

[HTML]
HTML Standard. Anne van Kesteren; Domenic Denicola; Dominic Farolino; Ian Hickson; Philip Jägenstedt; Simon Pieters. WHATWG. Living Standard. URL: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/
[INFRA]
Infra Standard. Anne van Kesteren; Domenic Denicola. WHATWG. Living Standard. URL: https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/
[JSON]
The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format. T. Bray, Ed. IETF. December 2017. Internet Standard. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8259
[JSON-LD11]
JSON-LD 1.1. Gregg Kellogg; Pierre-Antoine Champin; Dave Longley. W3C. 16 July 2020. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/
[JSON-LD11-API]
JSON-LD 1.1 Processing Algorithms and API. Gregg Kellogg; Dave Longley; Pierre-Antoine Champin. W3C. 16 July 2020. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11-api/
[JSON-LD11-FRAMING]
JSON-LD 1.1 Framing. Dave Longley; Gregg Kellogg; Pierre-Antoine Champin. W3C. 16 July 2020. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11-framing/
[RFC2119]
Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels. S. Bradner. IETF. March 1997. Best Current Practice. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119
[RFC3986]
Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. T. Berners-Lee; R. Fielding; L. Masinter. IETF. January 2005. Internet Standard. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986
[RFC3987]
Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs). M. Duerst; M. Suignard. IETF. January 2005. Proposed Standard. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3987
[RFC4288]
Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures. N. Freed; J. Klensin. IETF. December 2005. Best Current Practice. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4288
[RFC6838]
Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures. N. Freed; J. Klensin; T. Hansen. IETF. January 2013. Best Current Practice. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6838
[RFC6906]
The 'profile' Link Relation Type. E. Wilde. IETF. March 2013. Informational. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6906
[RFC8174]
Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words. B. Leiba. IETF. May 2017. Best Current Practice. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174
[RFC9110]
HTTP Semantics. R. Fielding, Ed.; M. Nottingham, Ed.; J. Reschke, Ed. IETF. June 2022. Internet Standard. URL: https://httpwg.org/specs/rfc9110.html
[YAML]
YAML Ain't Markup Language (YAML™) version 1.2.2. Oren Ben-Kiki; Clark Evans; Ingy döt Net. YAML Language Development Team. 2021-10-01. URL: https://yaml.org/spec/1.2.2/
[yaml-ld-extended-profile]
YAML-LD Extended Profile. Gregg Kellogg; Pierre-Antoine Champin; Anatoly Scherbakov. W3C. W3C Draft Group Note. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/yaml-ld-extended-profile/

D.2 Informative references

[ECMASCRIPT]
ECMAScript Language Specification. Ecma International. URL: https://tc39.es/ecma262/multipage/
[LINKED-DATA]
Linked Data Design Issues. Tim Berners-Lee. W3C. 27 July 2006. W3C-Internal Document. URL: https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
[RDF-SCHEMA]
RDF Schema 1.1. Dan Brickley; Ramanathan Guha. W3C. 25 February 2014. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/
[RDF11-CONCEPTS]
RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax. Richard Cyganiak; David Wood; Markus Lanthaler. W3C. 25 February 2014. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/
[RFC8259]
The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format. T. Bray, Ed. IETF. December 2017. Internet Standard. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8259
[RFC9512]
YAML Media Type. R. Polli; E. Wilde; E. Aro. IETF. February 2024. Informational. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9512
[TURTLE]
RDF 1.1 Turtle. Eric Prud'hommeaux; Gavin Carothers. W3C. 25 February 2014. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/
[URI]
Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. T. Berners-Lee; R. Fielding; L. Masinter. IETF. January 2005. Internet Standard. URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986