Re: [Specifications] Simplify discovery of collections that contain resources of a certain type

> Why did you decide to introduce hydra:partition instead of reusing hydra:collection? I don't see a reason why we couldn't reuse it here.

:+1: let's just use `hydra:collection`

 > There may be use cases that require entities of the same type to be split based on another property. Think for instance stores split by country. So maybe instead going the easy route and use memberType which optimizes for this main use case, we should explore whether a construct describing constraints would make sense.

Doesn't `manages` block already handle such 'based on another property' case?

```json
{
    "@id": "/api/events/france",
    "@type": "Collection",
    "manages": {
      "property": "schema:location",
      "object": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q142"
}
```

Actually I haven't thought before about just relying on `rdf:type`

```json
{
    "@id": "api/events/france",
    "@type": "Collection",
    "manages": {
      "property": "rdf:type",
      "object": "schema:Event"
}
```

I don't remember if we discussed `manages` with multiple values, which your constraint suggestion seems to aim at, how would it handle using properties in `@reverse` direction?



-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by elf-pavlik
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/126#issuecomment-316141782 using your GitHub account

Received on Tuesday, 18 July 2017 17:45:43 UTC