Re: Link, operation keywords

>     </Class> hydra:supportedOperation <OpA> .
>     </Class> hydra:operation <OpB> .
>
>     </res> rdf:type </Class> .
>     </res> hydra:operation <OpC> .
>
>
> With this information, a server tells a client that the resource </Class> supports OpB but *not* OpA. </res> supports OpA (because it is an instance of /Class) and OpC.

This is very similar to how javascript works. In js terms,
hydra:operation is for setting property on the actual object and
hydra:supportedOperation is for setting property on the prototype of a
constructor (which in js is an object as well).

> hydra:Link allows you to express that a property should be interpreted as a link instead of just an ordinary RDF property. In other words, if you encounter something like:...

Am I right, that (in JSON-LD terms)  @type: "@id" describes that we
are talking about an IRI, and @type: "hydra:Link" describes that we
are talking about a dereferencable IRI?


> Does this clarify it?

Yes, most of it. I found it in your dissertation too. Nice work btw! :-)

I think the vocab description here:
http://www.hydra-cg.com/spec/latest/core/ should contain this in more
detail.

Btw. it is easier for me to read the RDF syntax you just used. By
JSON-LD for me it is a constant source of confusion that I am not sure
at first sight whether we are talking about a context (vocab) document
or a request/response which uses that context. It would be much easier
to understand these concepts if at least one example would describe a
class defined in an application specific vocab along with an instance
of it contained by a response message.

I guess the specification is incomplete, because the vocab is not
stable yet, but I believe it would be much easier to contribute if the
actual specification draft were always up to date and more detailed.

Received on Friday, 10 October 2014 23:01:26 UTC