W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > February 2013

RE: ISSUE-37 WAS:Proposal for containers

From: Miguel Esteban Gutiérrez <mesteban@fi.upm.es>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 09:14:30 +0100
To: 'Raúl García Castro' <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>, "'Steve Battle'" <steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk>
Cc: "'Arnaud Le Hors'" <lehors@us.ibm.com>, <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01bd01ce0054$29390a60$7bab1f20$@fi.upm.es>
I totally agree with Raúl's point. 

This also raises another point which is related to the separation between
the protocol 
data and user data, that is, how does the protocol deal with data sent by
the user that 
includes contents represented with the vocabulary used by the protocol.




Miguel Esteban Gutiérrez
Ontology Engineering Group
Facultad de Informática - Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

C/ Ciruelos, 2, Boadilla del Monte,
28660 - Madrid - ESPAÑA
Phone:
+34 91 336 36 70


Fax:
+34 91 352 48 19



> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Raúl García Castro [mailto:rgarcia@fi.upm.es]
> Enviado el: viernes, 01 de febrero de 2013 8:52
> Para: Steve Battle
> CC: Arnaud Le Hors; public-ldp-wg@w3.org
> Asunto: Re: ISSUE-37 WAS:Proposal for containers
> 
> El 31/01/13 23:44, Steve Battle escribió:
> >
> > On 31 Jan 2013, at 22:05, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com
> > <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> Steve Battle <steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk
> >> <mailto:steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk>> wrote on 01/31/2013 12:10:06 PM:
> >>
> >> > From: Steve Battle <steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk
> >> <mailto:steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk>>
> >> > To: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS, "public-ldp-wg@w3.org
> >> <mailto:public-ldp-wg@w3.org>"
> >> > <public-ldp-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-ldp-wg@w3.org>>,
> >> > Date: 01/31/2013 12:11 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: ISSUE-37 WAS:Proposal for containers
> >> >
> >> > On 31 Jan 2013, at 19:54, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com
> >> <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > One argument against introducing ldp:contains or any such new
> >> > predicate is that we want to encourage reuse and this doesn't.
> >> > I'm not really sure this is independent of ISSUE-37. As the draft
> >> > stands it only supports composition and if that's all we end up
> >> > with there won't be any confusion about what rdfs:member is about,
> >> > will
> >> there?
> >> >
> >> > My understanding is that the spec being silent on aggregation only
> >> > means that it places no constraints on the way that users are able
> >> > to create their own RDF aggregations.
> >>
> >> Indeed.
> >>
> >> > Therefore, there is every chance that the existing composition
> >> > model can be confused with user aggregation unless it introduces
> >> > its own vocabulary as proposed.
> >>
> >> Since one can choose to use different predicates to indicate
> >> membership in a container people can't - and shouldn't! - rely on the
> >> predicate being used to figure out whether they are dealing with an
> >> LDPC or not. They need to look at whether the resource is of class
> >> ldp:Container.
> >
> > I agree with you if the issue is that of determining the resource type.
> > However, this proposal addresses a different concern, i.e. that if
> > predicates like rdfs:member are used for composition then this makes
> > it difficult to distinguish between a resource POSTed to the container
> > (see Ashok's proposal item B.), and a resource linked to the container
> > using rdfs:member (see Ashok's proposal item F.).
> >
> > I would like to propose this a way to ensure that composition and
> > aggregation remain orthogonal.
> 
> Yes, that's the main point. If we use rdfs:member as a default container
> membership property, we are not allowing anyone to post resources whose
> representation includes rdfs:member and we do not allow servers to return
> a representation of a resource (that is not a container) using
rdfs:member.
> 
> Or we can allow it and make the implementation of clients and servers much
> more costly.
> 
> --
> 
> Dr. Raúl García Castro
> http://delicias.dia.fi.upm.es/~rgarcia/
> 
> Ontology Engineering Group
> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
> Campus de Montegancedo, s/n - Boadilla del Monte - 28660 Madrid
> Phone: +34 91 336 36 70 - Fax: +34 91 352 48 19
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 11:23:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 9 May 2013 13:44:29 UTC