- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 09:55:44 +0200
- To: pp.wasin@gmail.com
- Cc: public-hydra@w3.org
>> Is okay (because hydra:filter would be a subproperty of it);
>> but then I wonder what the difference is with TPF?
>>
> Firstly, let me clarify that i don't want to change TPF.
> I just want to adopt TPF into hydra:Collection.
> So if there are anything incorrect against current specification of
> TPF, please correct me.
You're totally free to do that, no worries :-)
> ######1) The TPF example (triple pattern)#####
> CONSTRUCT { ?s rdfs:label ?label }
> WHERE {
> ?s rdfs:label ?label .
> }
> ######2) My API (graph pattern)##########
> CONSTRUCT { ?member rdfs:label ?label }
> WHERE {
> <http://example.org/collection> hydra:member ?member .
> ?member rdfs:label ?label .
> }
Ah okay, the _subject_ of the triple is a member of some collection.
I get it now. That's a difference indeed.
> Therefore, I decide to use hydra:filter to fix this sentence in the
> server implementation:
> <http://example.org/collection> hydra:member ?member .
> Then the client only assign the property of member, that is rdfs:label.
Ah, I understand! But that's not what hydra:filter does.
You'd probably need something like (warning: mock-up)
<http://example.org/collection>
hydra-ex:filter [
hydra:template "http://example.org/collection{?p}";
hydra:mapping [ hydra:variable "p"; hydra:property rdf:predicate ],
[ hydra-ex:constant "http://example.org/collection"; hydra:property rdf:subject ]
].
Here, I used hydra-ex to indicate properties that do not exist officially.
We thus need to inject a constant in the filter, I think.
Any opinions?
Ruben
Received on Tuesday, 6 October 2015 07:56:16 UTC