- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:25:58 +0200
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-hydra@w3.org
> If it's a boolean with a default value of false you just need to check for > true. You also know that there will only ever be two ways to do this, not > dozens of them. There could also be a default for a non-boolean property. (And note that "defaults" are hard in an open world anyway; but we can indeed make assumptions.) > I don't consider being able to describe arbitrary > existing Web APIs with Hydra an important requirement anymore. As soon as > you start describing requests that involve payloads, you will run into lots > of issues that aren't worth the hassle and the required complexity to make > them work IMO. Sure, but keeping our options open in the future seems reasonable. > Interoperability is created my eliminating > variability as much as possible. I think this is a low-hanging fruit. Mmm, also true… But then I'd again say that a non-boolean is not more complicated; so we get possible future extensibility at no cost. >>>>>> - the datatype xsd:string is always omitted >> >> It's just a datatype like any other. I would not disallow it for that >> reason. > > You are probably right. But then even the SHOULD doesn't make much sense. In > that case, a MAY omit is probably better. +1 Ruben
Received on Thursday, 24 July 2014 07:26:29 UTC