Re: Pagination - let's finalize the collection design (ISSUE-42)

2015-10-13 11:19 GMT+02:00 Tomasz Pluskiewicz <tomasz@t-code.pl>:

> Oh my, I see what Markus fears. It is certainly possible to combine all sorts of
> external vocabs and create a Franken-Hydra.

What would Franken-Hydra look like? I'm not sure I would draw the line
for when Hydra turns into a monster the same place as everyone else on
this list. I might, I'm just not sure, so an example would be useful.
:-)

> But that said they are out there for reuse, provided that they don't introduce
> some fancy semantics.

The fact that they exist and are well known (as per their usage in
HTML, HTTP headers and elsewhere) trumps "fancy semantics", imho. It's
of course a balance, but the relations we're discussing in this thread
does not come with any sort of fancy semantics and some even have
lengthy RFCs that explain the samtics they convey. If Hydra defines
new relations, we're basically throwing all of that work away and need
to do it ourselves, quite possibly in a way that is incompatible with
the existing semantics and usage.

As I've written elsewhere[1]:

The current situation is indeed harmful and even more fragmentation is
being suggested as we write this, by different RDF based vocabularies
defining their own semantics and names for relations that already
exist in IANA. Not having a single registry for this that can support
RDF, HTML5 and HTTP headers is quite terrible.

> And I agree non-RDF people would not even notice, when URIs are
> hidden in @context.

I disagree. I think they will notice. They will think it's familiar,
because it's what they've already seen in HTML and the HTTP `Link`
header. They will at least notice if we don't align Hydra's vocabulary
with existing standards, because stuff will look unfamiliar to them.

> And those familiar with RDF, would they have any problem with
> reusing terms from other vocabularies?

Isn't that the whole point of RDF; being able to mix and mash
vocabularies of all sorts and shapes  together to create semantic
bridges between different ontologies that can be navigated in powerful
(new) ways?

____
[1] https://github.com/mnot/I-D/issues/39#issuecomment-148041742

-- 
Asbjørn Ulsberg           -=|=-        asbjorn@ulsberg.no
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»

Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2015 13:16:14 UTC