Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-59 (recursive-delete): Reconsider usage of Aggregate/Composite construct to get predictable container delete behavior

On 4/19/13 5:21 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote:
> hello kinsgley.
>
> On 2013-04-19 12:23 , "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>>     A directory has a *containment* relation with resources.
>>     A directory also has symbolic link (so to speak) relation with
>>     resources.
>>     The relations above are inescapable. To ignore them is to introduce
>>     regression or undue limitations. Henry explained the logic with
>>     clarity.
> it all depends on use cases, at least for the REST side of things. if
> you're just browsing, you don't care about the difference between a file,
> a hard link, and a soft link.

Correct.

>   once you start doing other things (such as
> being able to add something as content, hard link, or soft link; or
> removing something and understanding whether you're just unlinking or
> actually deleting it), that difference becomes relevant and has to be
> exposed.

Yes, and it is exposed by the semantics of the relation, as outlined in 
the ontology by Henry.


> typically in REST, you start with use cases, design stateless
> hypermedia-based application flows, make sure you have the interaction
> data model and interaction affordances in place, and then you have a
> working design (for that use case).

Yes, and with RDF based Linked Data there is a fundamental affordance 
called: machine-readable and comprehensible relation semantics. The 
schema is logic i.e., First-order logic. The aformentioned affordance is 
intrinsic to RDF based Linked Data.

You can look at it this way:

RDF based Linked Data delivers an affordance that enables URLs denote 
Web documents that describe entities (which may or may not be Web 
accessible) via URIs i.e, said URIs are denoted by URIs. If you don't 
agree with this affordance then you simply have to toss RDF based Linked 
Data  out of the window re. this entire effort.  To call such an effort 
the "Linked Data Platform" and then also claim it is based on RDF,  and 
in line with TimBL's Linked Data meme etc.., becomes a wasteful 
distortion or reality.

A Generic Linked Platform is not an RDF based Linked Data Platform. The 
affordances aren't isomorphic.

I suspect Henry and others are exhausted, hence their silence re. this 
permathread.
>
> cheers,
>
> dret.
>
>
>


-- 

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