- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 19:38:51 +0000
- To: public-hydra-logs@w3.org
@asbjornu: > Is there any particular reason why `"hydra:addMember"` has an `@id` Indeed there is. This is not an operation. It's a link. In triples it would be represented as `</api/events> hydra:addMember </api/events/new>`. I realise that the I chose the predicate poorly. The intention was for a link between the collection and the resource used to created new members. The `target` in the terminology you use. So again, the target of the operation is always the parent in JSON-LD. The subject in the `?subject hydra:operation ?operation` triple. Hence, no need for an explicit `target` property. > If `@type` states `schema:CreateAction` and expects is set to `schema:Event`, isn't it obvious that the operation creates events (within the current scope, being the `hydra:Collection`)? Do we need to complicate this further? Maybe we don't but I do see the value in letting the client know that the created event will become a member of a given collection. This way you can, **optionally**, describe side effects on other resources shall you need to. > Sorry, but I don't fancy the hydra:BreakLinkEffect proposal, as it sounds way too finegrained to belong in the core vocabulary I agree. You're right that the core should only include an *abstract* term. An extension point for implementation by specialised vocabularies. I just wanted this as an illustration of how the idea can be executed. This is also something not crucial for a generic client. It could safely ignore this description and still be able to successfully perform the operation. *So maybe this should probably be the deciding factor in any argument whether something belongs to the core vocabulary - is it necessary for a generic client. Anything else should be an extension.* > Lastly, what's the difference between the properties prefixed with `hydra:` and those who doesn't? No difference I think. However we're accustomed that we don't prefix the common terms. I prefer to add prefix to something that isn't officially in the vocabulary. > With this uniformity, it's pretty easy to write a client We already have this uniformity. The target is always the parent. `@id` or `hydra:templated` to be filled in. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tpluscode Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/141#issuecomment-338303450 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 20 October 2017 19:38:54 UTC