- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz <tomasz@t-code.pl>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 15:25:12 +0100
- To: public-hydra@w3.org
On 2015-01-10 14:17, Thomas Hoppe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't see why we would need `hydra:allowedIndividual`. I have
> something easier in mind:
> I would just enumerate the allowed individuals inline as they are.
> The API client knows only from the fact that the individuals are
> declared as `hydra:allowedIndividuals`
> that they make up the range of selection items from which it (or a user)
> can choose.
> The client could then look for usual properties like `rdfs:label` to
> present them to a user.
> In that case also all RDF/ JSON-LD mechanisms for localization would
> kick in as well.
>
> With inline enumeration:
>
> "hydra:allowedIndividuals": [
> {
> "@id": "EventCancelled",
> "rdfs:label": "manifestazione annullata"
> },
> {
> "@id": "EventPostponed",
> "rdfs:label": "manifestazione rinviata"
> }
> ]
>
This is pretty much what though of initially but I don't we should use
individuals in place of classes.
>
> Or with properties from some domain specific vocab:
>
> "hydra:allowedIndividuals": [
> {
> "someVocab:eventStatus": "EventCancelled",
> "rdfs:label": "manifestazione annullata"
> },
> {
> "someVocab:eventStatus": "EventPostponed",
> "rdfs:label": "manifestazione rinviata"
> }
> ]
>
What purpose does using some other predicate here serve? Will it have to
be same as the property described? What if it is not. I find this an
unnecessary complication for the client.
> Also I want to stress again that we also need
> to be able to link to some external resource:
>
> "hydra:allowedIndividuals": {
> "@id": "https://example.com/event_status/"
> }
>
> This could be a normal API resource, a hydra collection probably.
> But also in this case, It would be awkward if every item in this collection
> would need to have an `hydra:allowedIndividual` property.
>
Ah yes, I like where this is going. I was myself about to write about a
case where the individuals are filtered by the user. Think auto-complete
<select /> as a common example.
How would it be possible to reuse (templated) links as an option for
remote source of available individuals? Also would we restrict the
response somehow to hydra:Collection?
Regards,
Tom
> Greets, Thomas
>
>
> On 01/10/2015 07:51 AM, Dietrich Schulten wrote:
>> In order to get internationalized captions for allowed individuals one
>> could do the following. If :allowedIndividuals is expected to contain
>> objects with an attribute :allowedIndividual (:allowedIndividuals
>> :range :AllowedIndividual), one can use that with "@type":"vocab" to
>> interpret the values as individuals in the default vocab, here enum
>> values in schema.org (see below and [1]).
>>
>> Drawback: If someone just wants enum values without captions, things
>> are more complicated than necessary.
>>
>> Opinions?
>>
>> Assuming that the client requested Italian as language (the other
>> language facilities of json ld such as @language or language map would
>> work, too [2]).
>>
>> {
>> "@context": {
>> "@vocab": "http://schema.org/",
>> "hydra": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/core#",
>> "hydra:allowedIndividual": {
>> "@type": "@vocab"
>> },
>> },
>> ...
>> "hydra:supportedProperty": [
>> {
>> "hydra:property": "eventStatus",
>> "hydra:allowedIndividuals": [
>> {
>> "hydra:allowedIndividual": "EventCancelled",
>> "hydra:title": "manifestazione annullata"
>> },
>> {
>> "hydra:allowedIndividual": "EventPostponed",
>> "hydra:title": "manifestazione rinviata"
>> }
>> ]
>> }
>> ]
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> In JSONLD-Playground:
>> [1] http://tinyurl.com/qz85ep6
>> [2] http://tinyurl.com/om7fsqc
>>
>> Am 09.01.2015 um 18:03 schrieb Dietrich Schulten:
>>>
>>> I was considering to use oslc:allowedValue in hydra-java but wasn't
>>> sure if I could use it because its value is explicitly a reference to
>>> another class, not an embeddable restriction - and I need it in
>>> embedded form for the moment.
>>> I see the label-value problem, too. I'll try to make it work with
>>> @type:vocab.
>>>
>>> On January 9, 2015 5:17:38 PM Kev Kirkland <kev@dataunity.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just to chime in - I agree also.
>>>>
>>>> I've implemented the 'oslc:allowedValue' system from Resource Shape
>>>> 2.0 [1] in the AngularJS Hydra client [2]. It's a stop gap solution
>>>> as I needed something working in a hurry for Data Unity. I went with
>>>> OSLC as it was quick to understand and implement, but I'm very open
>>>> minded about other solutions.
>>>>
>>>> One of the issues I've found with 'oslc:allowedValue' is that I
>>>> can't find a way to specify a label for an RDF literal 'enum' value.
>>>> This means the label in the HTML option list matches the literal
>>>> value used in the vocab, which isn't always easily understood by the
>>>> user. This could well be down to my lack of understanding about OSLC
>>>> though.
>>>>
>>>> I've only put 'oslc:allowedValue' directly on the resource
>>>> representation at this stage, so I haven't figured out how to
>>>> integrate it closely with Hydra. The AngularJS Hydra client looks
>>>> for OSLC information on the Resource when building the Form view,
>>>> then uses it to populate HTML drop downs on the page.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Kev
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2014/SUBM-shapes-20140211/
>>>> [2] https://github.com/dataunity/dataunity-hydra-client
>>>>
>>>> On 9 January 2015 at 15:23, Thomas Hoppe <thomas.hoppe@n-fuse.de
>>>> <mailto:thomas.hoppe@n-fuse.de>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I just wanted to add that I consider the case Dietrich is
>>>> describing;
>>>> in my own words:
>>>> Specifying expected properties _plus_ a range/ resource/
>>>> collection/ enumeration
>>>> of potential values a very important one.
>>>> Ex: User profile creation case where you ask for the country of
>>>> residence of a user and expect an item from a resource in the
>>>> same API as value.
>>>> I wanted to bring up this case earlier but wanted to wait until
>>>> we have resolved the
>>>> "easy" scenarios.
>>>> I also think that OWL restrictions are probably too hard to
>>>> understand/ implement
>>>> and that only because of this I think that having a property
>>>> like `hydra:range`
>>>> could make sense.
>>>>
>>>> Greets, Thomas
>>>>
>>>> On 01/06/2015 12:21 PM, Dietrich Schulten wrote:
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 05.01.2015 um 11:15 schrieb Ruben Verborgh:
>>>>>> HI Dietrich,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [From issue text:]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Isn't that part of ontological modelling, and thus
>>>>>>>> part of the
>>>>>>>> property?
>>>>>>> I do not think the ontological model of a property covers it.
>>>>>> Perhaps not all cases, but I think for many.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the one hand, sometimes not all possible values are
>>>>>>> predefined, but they may be extensible by individuals from other
>>>>>>> vocabs, see the usage of goodrelations enums fromschema.org
>>>>>>> <http://schema.org>.
>>>>>> In that case, you might have a more specific property. (But I
>>>>>> realize this modeling-based solution is not for everybody.)
>>>>> What about the other hand [from issue text]?
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the other hand, while a value might occur on a class in
>>>>>>> general,
>>>>> it might not be suitable in a particular context.
>>>>>
>>>>> For instance, assume that only the creator of an event should
>>>>> be able
>>>>> to cancel it altogether (PUT eventStatus EventCanceled), others
>>>>> can
>>>>> only change the status to rescheduled or postponed. Or, let's
>>>>> say it
>>>>> should only be possible to reschedule an event as long as we
>>>>> are more
>>>>> than two weeks away from the event date.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a REST service implementor I would like to tell the client
>>>>> exactly
>>>>> which status changes are available for a resource right now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there OWL constructs which would allow me to do so?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, the Resource Shapes paper [1] section 4 discusses another
>>>>> point
>>>>> why OWL is not well suited to describe application constraints. As
>>>>> they put it, "Unfortunately, an OWL reasoner will go to great
>>>>> lengths
>>>>> to make some superficially inconsistent looking graphs
>>>>> consistent". By
>>>>> saying that a property :owner is a :functionalProperty of a
>>>>> :ChangeRequest, I do not prevent people to post a ChangeRequest
>>>>> with
>>>>> two owners :Bob and :Joe. A reasoner would simply infer that
>>>>> :Bob and
>>>>> :Joe must be the same resource and happily accept the change
>>>>> request.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you think rdfs:range, it is not about value constraints but
>>>>>>> inference, so it doesn't enumerate possible values at all (I've
>>>>>>> learned that much by now). Or do you have something else in
>>>>>>> mind?
>>>>>> OWL does it. I understand most people don't want to go that
>>>>>> “complex” (even though it's quite alright), but we should just be
>>>>>> aware that a modeling-based solution also exists.
>>>>> And it would have the beauty that it is already available and the
>>>>> concepts are known, at least by modelers. I would certainly prefer
>>>>> that over defining new hydra properties.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you have in mind, maybe owl:Restriction?
>>>>>
>>>>>> For example: foaf:knows has a range of foaf:Person. If we're
>>>>>> developing a social application, it might make sense to restrict
>>>>>> this to only people on the network. Yet listing them exhaustively
>>>>>> would probably not make sense. So then perhaps a ex:knows
>>>>>> (subproperty of foaf:knows) where the range is “people from the
>>>>>> network” makes sense.
>>>>>>
>>>>> But how can I express a Range "people from the
>>>>> network", given that
>>>>> the number of people on the network is dynamic? You bring up an
>>>>> interesting point. A ReST service would also want to tell the
>>>>> client:
>>>>> use this link (or IriTemplate) to get a hydra:Collection of
>>>>> allowed
>>>>> values. A third property hydra:allowedResources which may
>>>>> contain an
>>>>> IriTemplate or a plain Resource which can be dereferenced into a
>>>>> Collection or PagedCollection could achieve that. I'll update #82
>>>>> accordingly [2] and see which comments I get :)
>>>>>
>>>>> The original purpose of #82 is to have a means to list a rather
>>>>> limited number of possible values and to leverage @type:@vocab for
>>>>> enumerated values likehttp://schema.org/DeliveryMethod which has
>>>>> members from goodrelations.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]http://events.linkeddata.org/ldow2013/papers/ldow2013-paper-02.pdf
>>>>> [2]https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/82
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - -- Dietrich Schulten
>>>>> Escalon System-Entwicklung
>>>>> Bubenhalde 10
>>>>> 74199 Untergruppenbach
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>>> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
>>>>>
>>>>> iEYEARECAAYFAlSrxUcACgkQuKLNitGfiZP6PgCgts8wESKTDz3atmXofBPheWTt
>>>>> ACAAn2S9kUWiUwpgZUd/cPXnDujw00ib
>>>>> =z5B1
>>>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> www.dataunity.org <http://www.dataunity.org>
>>>> twitter: @data_unity
>>
>
>
Received on Saturday, 10 January 2015 14:26:06 UTC