W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hydra@w3.org > June 2014

RE: How to avoid that collections "break" relationships (ISSUE-41)

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 00:11:42 +0200
To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
Message-ID: <080601cf84f8$f69cc9e0$e3d65da0$@gmx.net>
On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 7:16 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> On Jun 10, 2014, at 5:25 AM, Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
wrote:
> >> What other terms apart from isCollectionOf would be fine for you?
> >
> > Brainstorm below (not necessarily all valid options, just to keep ideas
flowing):
> >
> > - </alice/friends> :collects [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :collectionTemplate [ :subject </alice> :property
foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :hasCollectionTemplate [ :subject </alice> :property
foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :contains [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :containsTemplate [ :subject </alice> :property
foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :consistsOf [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows
]
> > - </alice/friends> :provides [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :lists [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :organizes [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
> > - </alice/friends> :handles [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
> >
> > (Note that these last proposals go in the direction of manages;
> > I'm trying to pinpoint the term more precisely-not saying I'm succeeding
:-)

Great... this is very helpful. Some more ideas

 - </alice/friends> :covers [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
 - </alice/friends> :binding [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
 - </alice/friends> :holds [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows ]
 - </alice/friends> :memberTemplate [ :subject </alice> :property foaf:knows
]
 - </alice/friends> :relationshipTemplate [ :subject </alice> :property
foaf:knows ]


> In the spirit of not trying to bind this too closely to collections:
> 
> contains - Probably not quite right. This seems more like an enumeration,
rather than a
> template.
> containsTemplate - This seems to satisfy the criteria of a template
describing things which
> are contained in a collection (or something else)

I would like to avoid "contains" as that will sooner or later spark a
discussion what "containment" means. Can you "add" resources from a
different API? Are they contained or just referenced?


> consistsOf - same as contains

Slightly better than contains IMO.


> provides - This is reasonable

Provides sounds a bit weird to me. A collection is not really a producer of
something (in most cases)... but perhaps it also just depends on how we call
the "manages block".


> lists - hmm
> organizes - pretty much equivalent to manages IMO
> handles - pretty much equivalent to manages IMO

Agreed. I quite like handles but it is really just a synonym of manages,
isn't it?


> So, I'd go with one of containsTemplate, provides, organizes, handles, or
manages. The
> containsTemplate probably has the most meaning, but is a mouth-full.
Provides might
> actually be the best.
> 
> containsTemplate: +0.5
> provides: +0.6
> organizes: 0
> handles: 0
> manages: 0

How would we call the "manages block" if we were to choose containsTemplate
or provides?

 
> > PS I don't feel as strongly about this particular issue as some e-mails
seem to indicate;
> > I just want to help ensure that we pick the right names for terms.

Better to get this right now as otherwise we have to live with it forever.
So thanks for bringing in other perspectives to look at these things.


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2014 22:12:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:42 UTC