RE: Representation of Collections

On Wednesday, October 09, 2013 2:52 PM, Thomas Hoppe wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As I continue to try to understand Hydra I came across the fact that
> the hydra:Collection is not a subclass
> of one of RDFs container types like SEQ (which would be the best
> matching one I think).
> I'm sure there is a reason why this as not been modeled as such,
> can you please share this?

The reason is quite simple. I didn't want to inherit any of the semantics
and confuse users with things like rdf:_1, rdf:_2, etc. Furthermore, all of
these classes (rdf:Alt, rdf:Bag, and rdf:Seq) have been marked as archaic
[1-2] and thus shouldn't be used for new vocabularies such as Hydra anymore.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/24
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/77

(scroll down to the very end)


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 14:27:28 UTC