W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hydra@w3.org > January 2015

Re: remove hydra:Resource and hydra:Class

From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 16:30:17 +0100
Cc: public-hydra@w3.org
Message-Id: <9A47B8AA-2BA1-4403-8E74-E55FFBC5BE17@ugent.be>
To: Thomas Hoppe <thomas.hoppe@n-fuse.de>
Hi Thomas,

> I thought about this in the past but settled with the simple fact that
> the difference is the fact that hydra:Resource hints for the ability to dereference.

But that's not an ontological concern.
An ontology relates concepts;
whether or not those concepts dereference
depends on the addressing scheme you use to identify them.

> But aren't statements like this the actual problem?:
> 
>    {
>      "@id": "hydra:entrypoint",
>      "@type": "hydra:Link",
>      "domain": "hydra:ApiDocumentation",
>      "label": "entrypoint",
>      "range": "hydra:Resource"
>    }
> 
> If we change to this:
> 
>    {
>      "@id": "hydra:entrypoint",
>      "@type": "hydra:Link",
>      "domain": "hydra:ApiDocumentation",
>      "label": "entrypoint",
>      "range": "rdfs:Resource"
>    }
> 
> Isn't this saying that if we have a rdfs:Resource which
> has an hydra:entrypoint, the resource is also a hydra:ApiDocumentation.

Yes it does, and it already does currently.
At the moment, anything that has a hyra:endtrypoint property is,
by definition, a hydra:ApiDocumentation, hydra:Resource, and rdfs:Resource.
But that is said by the "domain" line, not the "range" line.

Best,

Ruben
Received on Monday, 5 January 2015 15:30:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:44 UTC