Re: Link, operation keywords

Okay, these are 2 words (hydra:supportedOperation, hydra:Operation).

We don't necessary need the hydra:Operation. For example we can use an
rdf:type, like schema:BefriendAction from another vocab. What we
really need are the operation related properties, like hydra:method,
hydra:returns, etc... By RDF you don't need classes to define or use
properties, so you don't need the hydra:Operation class to do so. The
hydra:Operation class can be a base class of custom operations, but I
am not sure what's the gain of having such a base class.

What about the other 2 words (hydra:operation, hydra:Link)?


2014-09-23 23:38 GMT+02:00 Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>:
> Hi László
>
>> Do the machines really need 4 keywords to describe the same?
>
> It will need at least two; one type to say "this is an operation";
> one property to say "this is the operation of”. They are different things.
>
>> For a human the following would be enough: when something is under the
>> supportedOperation property, than it is an operation
>
> Note how you have the same two concepts here:
> “supportedOperation”, and "an operation”.
> So humans have also two concepts; nothing special about that.
>
> Machines can also make the above inference:
> the range of supportedOperation is Operation,
> so therefore, everything under supportedOperation is an operation.
> However, to do this, we of course need the concept “operation”.
>
> Best,
>
> Ruben

Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2014 18:34:07 UTC