Aaron (@Aaranged) points out that @value can be confusing - see his comments on this w.r.t. some google search features: https://plus.google.com/u/0/106943062990152739506/posts/1jPqwZ7HocE
Also note from #854 that we have JSON-LD context definitions that allow "type" and "id" (technically, mistakes) to be treated as if markup said "@type", "@id". We can't exactly do this with "@value" since (unlike id, type) there is actually a schema.org term of that name.
Minimally, the text for "/value" property should have something on this issue.
Nearby: In 2010 I wrote a history of the evolution of the rdf:value property at W3C, documenting its shifting definition.
Aaron (@Aaranged) points out that @value can be confusing - see his comments on this w.r.t. some google search features: https://plus.google.com/u/0/106943062990152739506/posts/1jPqwZ7HocE
Also note from #854 that we have JSON-LD context definitions that allow "type" and "id" (technically, mistakes) to be treated as if markup said "@type", "@id". We can't exactly do this with "@value" since (unlike id, type) there is actually a schema.org term of that name.
Minimally, the text for "/value" property should have something on this issue.
Nearby: In 2010 I wrote a history of the evolution of the rdf:value property at W3C, documenting its shifting definition.