- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 16:26:53 +0200
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
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