RE: Nested supportedProperty

On 15 Dez 2014 at 02:13, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
>> On Dec 14, 2014, at 11:44 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>> On 13 Dez 2014 at 14:08, Dietrich Schulten wrote:
>>> Am 13.12.2014 13:38, schrieb Dietrich Schulten:
>>>> in schema.org it is quite common to have nested types. E.g. a
>>>> reviewRating in a Review is actually of type (range) Rating. In
>>>> json-ld (copied from http://schema.org/Review):
>>> 
>>> See also https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/26 and the
>>> proposal in https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/37.
>>> 
>>> I ran into a known problem :)
>>> 
>>> #37 envisions quite a change to hydra. Is there a recommendation how
>>> to handle this for now, based on the current spec? Or should I
>>> implement the proposal in #37 already?
>> 
>> I don't really have an answer. I hope that the data shapes WG produces
>> something we can leverage instead of inventing our own thing but that
might
>> take quite a while. It wouldn't harm if you could experiment with the
>> proposed designs. It would help us to make an informed decision later. We
>> can also report the insights you get from doing that back to the RDF
Shapes
>> WG.
> 
> Nesting is a markup concern, not a data-model. The data model Hydra works
against is
> RDF. Nesting is a property of JSON-LD. Indeed the RDF Shapes WG is
interested in how
> graphs look, but not specific serializations AFAIK. Perhaps a JSON Path
expression on the
> resulting document would do this, or specifying a JSON-LD Frame to be used
when
> serializing the document, or just re-serialize on the client using that
frame.

I think what we all mean by "nesting" here is not the nesting in a JSON-LD
document but the structure or shape of the abstract RDF graph. I would like
to keep the mechanisms we use with Hydra as serialization agnostic as
possible.


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2014 23:26:26 UTC