RE: Schema.org properties having a collection as value and hydra:Collection

Hi Markus,

> On October 13, 2014 at 7:57 PM Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> On 13 Okt 2014 at 19:44, John Walker wrote:
> > Hi Markus
> >
> > [snip]
> >>
> >> This pattern works with all vocabularies, even the ones that use
> >> rdfs:range. Strictly speaking, with schema.org you wouldn't need
> >> that indirection but you end up with a "strange" triple if you
> >> don't
> >>
> >> /product review /product/reviews <-- this is the "strange" triple
> >> /product review /product/reviews/1
> >> /product review /product/reviews/2
> >> /product review /product/reviews/3
> >> ...
> >
> >
> > I'm not a fan of 'strictly speaking' approach. Just because it's not
> > explicitly ruled out doesn't make it 'right' to do. Way I see it is
> > it's so obvious it points to an event of some kind that you don't
> > need to state it.
>
> Well.. if you look at the recent addition of Roles in Schema.org you'll see
> that this pattern is being promoted (to some degree). Schema.org's
> rangeIncludes was specifically designed to allow this flexibility. The
> mantra is to make it as simple as possible for publishers at the expense of
> making the consumption of data more complex... but generally you can't trust
> data on the Web anyway without some additional measures.
>

That's no problem with Schema.org properties as no formal domain/range is
defined, but is Hydra intended only for use with Schema.org?
We can't rewrite the semantics of properties that do already have a domain/range
defined.

Anyway this topic is probably already discussed enough :)

John