Re: relate a Collection and a PagedCollection

On 4/27/14 4:45 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2014, at 1:24 PM, Kingsley Idehen<kidehen@openlinksw.com>  wrote:
>
>> >On 4/25/14 1:29 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>>> >>Yeah. I agree. Let me convert this to JSON-LD because I think that will be
>>> >>easier for a lot of people on this list to understand and evaluate. Here's
>>> >>Gregg's Turtle converted 1:1, the first page is the "central" resource:
>>> >>
>>> >>   {
>>> >>     "@id": "/collection",
>>> >>     "@type": "Page(dCollection)",
>>> >>     "member": [ "1", "2", "..." ],
>>> >>     "nextPage": /collection?page=2",
>>> >>     "pageOf": {
>>> >>       "@id": "/collection#dataset",
>>> >>       "@type": "Collection",
>>> >>       "totalItems": 243,
>>> >>       "itemsPerPage": 10,
>>> >>       "firstPage": "/collection",
>>> >>       "lastPage": "/collection?page=24"
>>> >>     }
>>> >>   }
>> >
>> >Converting to JSON-LD when discussing semantics is back to front. At the very least print JSON-LD and Turtle if you want many eyes to look at your examples. I thought we established this practice a while ago.
>> >
>> >JSON-LD (like RDF/XML) obscures entity relation semantics.
> In fairness, Markus was providing an alternative to the Turtle which was given earlier in the message stream. I think, given the subject of this list, that some people may be more comfortable with JSON-LD, and it may better reflect actual message content, as it's not always clear what the HTTP body boundaries are with Turtle. My original Turtle follows:
>
> </collection> a hydra:PagedCollection;
>   hydra:member <1>, <2>, ...;
>   hydra:nextPage </collection?page=2>;
>   hydra:pageOf </collection#dataset> .
> <collection#dataset> a hydra:Collection;
>   hydra:totalItems 243;
>   hydra:itemsPerPage 10;
>   hydra:firstPage </collection>;
>   hydra:lastPage </collection?page=24> .
>
> While I also prefer Turtle when talking about the model, I can't say I really see how the JSON-LD obscures the ER semantics, given the properties used in the Hydra vocabulary are implicit in this conversation.
>
> Gregg
>

It is unnatural to look a modelling using JSON-LD or RDF/XML. I don't 
see any circumstance in which JSON-LD only representations or entity 
relation semantics leads to broad participation and comprehension of 
these discussions.

Can we not get beyond the distractions of syntax when discussing 
semantics? I am only asking for JSON-LD and Turtle based examples, not 
one of the other.

BTW -- don't you think property definitions should be explicit when 
discussing semantics? All you do is use the URIs that denote the 
relationship properties in question and email readers can just click to 
de-reference and comprehend. Otherwise, the audience (eyes and minds) 
will be narrow and the output will simply get derailed at later stages 
in the process, which isn't what we want here.

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen