- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 23:21:00 +0100
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
On 13 Jan 2015 at 22:38, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Jan 13, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote: >> On 13 Jan 2015 at 09:51, Ruben Verborgh wrote: >>> In order to find out whether the other 5 resources are dereferenceable, >>> the crawler has to perform 5 GET requests. >>> 3 of them dereference, 2 do not. >> >> Right, but the goal is not to find out whether they are dereferenceable or >> not but whether it is worth (from the publishers POV) to follow them. > > Yes, but isn't this the purpose of marking a predicate a hydra:Link. > That seems to tell me what I need to know, indeed, to know a resource > is a hydra:Resource, I need a partial representation of the resource > to know its type, which I don't for a link. I think hydra:Link > provides everything we need. The range of a hydra:Link is hydra:Resource. So yes, they are basically doing the same. It gets a bit tricky if you have a property which is only in specific cases a link or whose definition you don't want to change. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2015 22:21:30 UTC