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

RE: Questions about new collection design

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:48:49 +0100
To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
Message-ID: <02e201d039c2$a25bd3b0$e7137b10$@gmx.net>
On 23 Jan 2015 at 10:16, Dietrich Schulten wrote:
> some questions about the new collection design.
> 
> {
>    "@id": "/alice",
>    "collection": {
>      "@id": "/alice/friends",
>      "@type": "Collection",
>      "manages": {
>        "property": "schema:knows",
>        "subject": "/alice"
>      }
>    }
> }
> 
> 
> 1. [...]

We already discussed 1 yesterday


> 2. As I read the example, the actual list of friends is a separate
> resource,

Correct

> so what we express here is a link to a json collection - as
> long as there is no :member property on the collection.

No, it always is a Collection. You explicitly declared it as one ("@type": "Collection")

> We could also embed the members (Alice's friends).

Right


> But this poses the more general
> question: how does the client decide whether it should dereference to
> get the actual friends

If it is interested in finding the friends it would do that. A Hydra client not only looks for schema:knows on /alice but also tries to find a hydra:collection on /alice which manages /alice schema:knows


> (or for object properties, the actual object).

We have a separate discussion about that I guess (ISSUE-91)


> Checking for the :member property or any sub-properties that are
> expected for an object to see if another GET is needed seems weird.

Why?


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 26 January 2015 23:49:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 26 January 2015 23:49:19 UTC