ldp:contains was: linking from resource -> container ..

On 2 Mar 2013, at 00:42, Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> 
> Arnaud, 
> 
>> While it is tempting to want to have "back links" - links from member resources to the containers they are member of - because it certainly can be convenient, we can't possibly require that of all implementations. 
>> 
> 
> Based on ex.2 in the spec: I believe that from a networth resource, it must be possible to discover the container(s) that a client then needs to interact with to manage its assets and liabilities details. 

It seems to me that this and a number of other issues point to the notion that we need 
an ldp:contains relation from container to the contained element.

The container would be written like this:

<> a ldp:Container;
     ldp:contains <card>;
     rdf:member <../other/somethingelse> .

And the content could if it wanted to then have an ldp:contains relation back. Eg
<card> could say:

<.> ldp:contains <> .
<> a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument;
     foaf:primaryTopic <#i> .

<#i> foaf:name "Arnaud" .

No need to invent a new relation from content back to container. We can use the
same relation in both cases.



> 
> I don't understand why you consider this to be a "back link" ?
> 
> Roger
> 
>> <> 
>>   a ldp:Container; 
>>   ldp:membershipSubject <http://example.org/netWorth/nw1>; 
>>   ldp:membershipPredicate o:asset. 
>> 
>> <http://example.org/netWorth/nw1> 
>>   a o:NetWorth; 
>>   o:asset <a1>, <a2>. 
>> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/