- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:47:15 -0700
- To: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
- Cc: public-hydra@w3.org
On Jun 10, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net> wrote: > > So, the question becomes, what URI should we use for the relation type? > Perhaps hydra:entrypoint can be used? In some cases, hydra:search may be > more appropriate? Or should we have something that would clearly state it > is TPF? Like http://linkeddatafragments.org/descriptions/tpf ? In discussing this with Kjetil on IRC, I had some questions about TPF and Hydra in general that I was hoping people on the list could help me understand (as someone who hasn’t been actively following the progress of Hydra). When I dereference a TPF fragment URL and parse the RDF I get back, how am I (or, rather, my program) to know that what I’ve gotten back are hypermedia controls for TPF? Is there any indication that the controls I’ve gotten back are TPF, and not some other sort of hypermedia API that happens to also require RDF-based subject, predicate, and object arguments? Especially since the TPF hydra:mapping uses properties that are not TPF-specific (rdf:subject, rdf:predicate, rdf:object), it seems strange to me that there’s no sort of extra typing information that identifies the API as specifically a TPF API. Have I missed something obvious here? thanks, .greg
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 07:47:42 UTC