- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 17:19:14 +0200
- To: "'Gregg Kellogg'" <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Cc: <public-hydra@w3.org>
On Sunday, April 27, 2014 4:48 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Apr 27, 2014, at 6:25 AM, "Markus Lanthaler" wrote: > > > >> On Friday, April 25, 2014 6:38 PM, Thomas Hoppe wrote: > >> Just my very compressed 50 Cent on this topic: > >> - I can follow Ruben's rationale to distinguish a Page and a Paged > >> Collection although I don't see how this would be relevant in > >> practice... I think about this from a perspective where you want a > >> collection be the Range of a property: We would not gain anything from > >> being able to specify a Page as range... this is an academic case I > >> think. Using a Paged Collection as range however, a consumer has a > >> useful concept at hand which, yes, is a hybrid. > > > > I think you'd "never" set the range of a property such as "knows" to Page, > > but would always set it to Collection. > > Really? I thought we had discussed this elsewhere, and wanted to be sure that the range of > :knows, could remain :Person, and not :Collection; I don't know a collection. We discussed it but didn't came to any conclusion yet. I still have to summarize that thread. It will take some time till I find to do so as I'm traveling a lot in the coming weeks. > I've been using :collectionProperty to relate a predicate to another predicate which is > intended to be a collection which manifests these :knows properties, or :collectionFor to do > the inverse. > > But, the point is taken, that (collection)properties of things should refer to Collections, and > not Pages. If we have Pages, then they are referred to from from a Collection. > > >> - I don't like the enumeration of Members as Greg proposed it. This is > >> so LDP, rdf:List but not common in APIs. > > > > I agree. That's my main concern. See the other thread. > > Hmm, I didn't think I was breaking new ground on this. What I wrote just said that a > collection has multiple members through the hydra:member property, not that they were in a > list, although it could be argued that they should be. I think was Thomas meant is that he didn't like how the example you posted looked like because that's not how representations in current Web APIs look like. I have yet to find an API where collections and collection pages are separate things. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Sunday, 27 April 2014 15:20:07 UTC