Re: Issue-37: Ontological Modelling

Henry:
" Similarly deleting updating or altering resources that are members of an ldp:Aggregtion does not have any required implication on an ldp:Aggregation."
If you delete a member of an Aggregation, shouldn't you first remove it from the Aggregation.
Otherwise, the Aggregation will contain a null pointer.

One other point, and this a matter of modelling philosophy.  In your formalism, Collections and Aggregations
are distinct classes and you cannot convert one to the other.  If we distinguished Collections and Aggregations
by the value of an attribute then you could easily change the value of the attribute and convert one to the other.  Is this important?  Perhaps.
Or, you could have convert operations that change one class to another.

All the best, Ashok

On 1/21/2013 8:54 AM, Henry Story wrote:
> I added to the wiki for Issue-37 an section which tries to give the
> first steps towards modelling LDP using ontologies.
>
>    http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ISSUE-37
>
> RDF is a development of logic, and logic was designed by Frege
> according to Robert B. Brandom ( Making it Explicit ) to make
> presuppositions we have explicit. By making it easy to trace
> the consequences of a statement one can reason about them
> much more carefully.
>
> Perhaps this can be then used to build the ldp ontology
> which needs to be published in the LDP namespace.
>
> Currently it seems that we can start distinguishing resources
> described by LDP by what types of HTTP operations they allow -
> which is not surprising since we are building a protocol. Since
> HTTP operations directed at one type of resource don't have
> the same meaning as when directed at another type or resource
> eg HTTP POST of a Graph on an LDPC and on an LDPR, this does
> seem to be useable to show that these are not overlapping
> classes.
>
> 	Henry
>
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>

Received on Monday, 21 January 2013 17:27:47 UTC