W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > November 2012

Re: Creation of Containers

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:06:07 -0500
Message-ID: <509BE67F.5020303@openlinksw.com>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On 11/8/12 11:30 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> That seems to be a non-issue for GET, PUT and DELETE. I can kind of see where you're coming from in the case of POST. But even there, the distinction between “take this set of triples, ignoring their semantics” and “take this set of triples, taking their semantics into account” still doesn't seem to call for a different media type. Again, the semantics is in the vocabularies. The fact that in some situations, one may want to exchange RDF graphs while  ignoring their semantics doesn't change that.
Apropos the comment above:
RDF content oriented media types imply that entity relationships (the 
graphs) and their semantics are discernible (and comprehensible) to 
compliant content processors.

The thing about RDF that sometimes gets lost is the fact that the entire 
system is described explicitly via vocabularies [1][2].

Links:

1. 
http://kingsley.idehen.net/describe/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkingsley.idehen.net%2Fabout%2Fid%2Fentity%2Fhttp%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Frdf-schema%2Frdfs-namespace 
-- RDF Schema describing RDF

2. 
http://kingsley.idehen.net/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F1999%2F02%2F22-rdf-syntax-ns%23Statement&gp=13&go= 
-- excerpts from the description of an RDF statement .

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







Received on Thursday, 8 November 2012 17:06:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:42 UTC