Re: Declaring restrictions on processed data

Mark:
> Jan:
>> I just realized that I would actually need some way of
>> specifying accepted
>> RDF graphs (e.g. via patterns[1]) to use RDF forms for what I have in
>> mind. What are
>> your feelings about such an addition?
>>
>
> I don't see the need.  But if you wanted to sketch out an example
> to prove me wrong, feel free.
>
My use case is that I want the resource to be able to say (by way of  
a form)
exactly what state change it accepts. This information can be used to  
generate
an HTML form for example. If I know the resource accepts changing its  
foo:status
to any of 'open','stalled','resolved' I can produce nice selects from  
this. If I
only know that the resource accepts application/rdf+xml then I am  
pretty much lost.

Since I also would want to use RDF forms to express the state machine  
as a whole
at configuration time (or maybe call it declarative programming if  
you want) I would
need the information what state changes are possible from what states.

But maybe we are talking past each other, dunno.

> FWIW, I think this is actually an issue generic to forms language at
> large, not RDF Forms specifically, so I think it's worth discussing
> here.


>
>  (*) cast using duck typing

Good one :o)

Jan


> Mark.
>
>

________________________________________________________________________ 
____________________
Jan Algermissen, Consultant & Programmer                              
http://jalgermissen.com
Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise IT'        
http://www.tugboat.de