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

Re: Discovery/Affordances

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:39:37 -0400
Message-ID: <51B60149.5010800@openlinksw.com>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote:
>> Perhaps we could do the HTTP/RDF community a favor to register the
>> >relation
>> >http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type  to the shorthand "type"
>> >so that
>> >the above could become
>> >Link:<http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Container>; rel="type"
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6903#section-6

So at least we have agreement on the semantics of the "type" Relation 
i.e., it denotes the same concept as 
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>. Thus, you have:

Link: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Container>; rel="type"

having the same meaning as the 3-tuple:

  { <> a ldp:Container }

Which goes to demonstrate that RDF's abstract syntax has nothing to do 
with Media Types. This simple example shows that RDF model theory 
semantics (which are abstract in nature) can be applied at the following 
levels:

1. HTTP
2. RDF documents
3. Even HTML documents -- by using <link/> reflect the very same 
Relation semantics expressed via the Link: header.

-- 

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 Monday, 10 June 2013 16:40:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:51 UTC