RE: variable representations edited for spec

Hi Ruben,

On 22 Dez 2014 at 20:46, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I have turned the IriTemplate variabel discussion [1][2] into a spec
proposal [3].
> Your comments are welcome!

Thanks a lot for taking the initiative on this.


> While writing this down, I came across 3 potential issues:
> 
> 1. Should hydra:BasicRepresentation and hydra:ExplicitRepresentation
>     have a superclass hydra:VariableRepresentation?
>     This would allow to set a specific range
>     on the hydra:variableRepresentation property.

I don't think that's necessary at this point. It doesn't add any concrete
value IMO and thus I'd rather like to keep the vocabulary as small as
possible instead of adding such helper classes for the sake of modeling it.


> 2. Currently, hydra:variableRepresentation's domain is hydra:IriTemplate.
>     Just to ensure that this is not an oversight, do we want to:
>     - Have this only on hydra:IriTemplate?
>       Then all variables of the template have the same representation
>       type.

AFAICT, that was the plan.

>    - Have this only on hydra:IriTemplateMapping? Then variables
>       of the template can have different representation types.
>   - Allow both of the above. Then variables of the template can have
>       different representation types, but we can also easily make them
>       all the same.

If we have a compelling use case, we could decide to do so. I'm less and
less a fan of using rdfs:domain/range as it prevents us from doing such
things in the future. What about switching to schema.org's
domainIncludes/rangeIncludes instead? I find that much more flexible. The
downside is that it forces author's to explicitly set the type.. but I think
that's a very small price to pay.


> 3. Section 5.2 of the document ("Templated Links") has now become large.
>     I was tempted to subsection this, but that would not be in line
>     with the rest of the document's structure.
>     Given a rewrite for the entire document is pending, I did not act yet.

I edited it slightly and removed the second example as it differed only in
the property used. Please have a look at my changes (I fear the diff won't
be very helpful) and let me know your opinion. I'll then go ahead, squash
the commits and merge the edits into the master branch.


Thanks again,
Markus


> [1] https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/30
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra/2014Oct/0119.html
> [3] https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/pull/79


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Monday, 29 December 2014 15:41:40 UTC