- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 22:41:06 -0700
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
Hi folks, Unfortunately it took a bit longer than expected but I've now created the wiki page summarizing all possible design that have been discussed. I re-read the whole thread. I tried to summarize very similar proposals and also tried to enumerate a few pros & cons of each proposal. The summary can be found here: https://www.w3.org/community/hydra/wiki/Avoid_that_collections_%22break%22_r elationships Feel free to edit the page if you have something to add. The design I like most is the one that one I summarized as "Link to the collection via a generic property". Specifically this one: </alice> hydra:hasCollection <alice/friends> . </alice/friends/> hydra:manages [ [hydra|rdf]:property schema:knows ; [hydra|rdf]:subject </alice> . ] . { "@id": "/alice", "hasCollection": { "@id": "/alice/friends", "manages": { "property": "schema:knows", "subject": "/alice" } } } I could also live with the "Use of a separate property to reference collections" proposal but I'm not really a big fan of the "Use of a blank node collection member to indirectly point to the collection" and "Use of an operation with an explicitly defined target" proposals. To keep this focused, let's try to first decide on the design before we start discussing the terms we end up using. Cheers, Markus -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2014 05:41:45 UTC