- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 21:14:20 +0100
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
Hi Dietrich, Taking this one and replying to more of the recent discussions tomorrow.. On 25 Jan 2015 at 19:10, Dietrich Schulten wrote: > To illustrate the first problem to those of us who read triples more > easily, please consider the Collection with embedded members below: > > </alice> hydra:collection </alice/friends> . > </alice/friends> a hydra:Collection ; > hydra:manages [ > hydra:property schema:knows ; > hydra:subject </alice> . > ] ; > hydra:member </bob> ; > hydra:member </zelda> . > > I hope I got the triples right :) This doesn't seem to say that That's correct > </alice> knows anyone at all. Not a problem? No, not really I'd say > I understand why we do this. A property like foaf:knows which has > foaf:Person as range: > > </alice> foaf:knows </alice/friends> > > would mislead a reasoner to infer that /alice/friends is a foaf:Person > known by /alice, although it is a hydra:Collection, not a Person. Exactly > But is there a way to express that the above also entails > > </alice> foaf:knows </bob> > </alice> foaf:knows </zelda> > > ? Sure, just add those triples :-) It starts to make more sense if you split the collection into multiple pages. We *could* also define "manages" in a way that would allow a reasoner to infer these triples automatically. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Sunday, 25 January 2015 20:14:51 UTC