Re: the necessity of describing responses in-band from Ruben Verborgh on 2015-11-11 (public-hydra@w3.org from November 2015)

From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 17:28:33 +0100
To: Karol Szczepański <karol.szczepanski@gmail.com>
Cc: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, Hydra <public-hydra@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1E6855E8-1600-45A8-BF9B-BEA7A516A8D7@ugent.be>

Hi Karol,

>> BTW, any particular reason for preferring a separate meta graph,
>> over letting graphs describe themselves, like the following?
>> <graph://a> {
>>   <graph://a> foaf:primaryTopic <http://a> .
>>   <http://a> some:value "" .
>> }
> As I wrote, RomanticWeb is a tool, thus it was easier and more efficient to have a single "special purpose" graph that can be queried than to have it scattered around the dataset. I feel it's also less polluting.

But how does the client find the metadata graph then?
Is that part hard-coded?

Best,

Ruben

Received on Wednesday, 11 November 2015 17:12:06 UTC