Re: Identifying thing resources

We use this approach:

1. Document

<document> a foaf:Document .

2. Document + thing

<document> a foaf:Document ;
  foaf:primaryTopic <document#thing> .

<document#thing> a owl:Thing ;
  foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf <document> .

Hope it helps.


Martynas
atomgraph.com

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:07 AM, László Lajos Jánszky
<laszlo.janszky@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry that I am a little bit off topic here, but there are lot of RDF
> ppl. here helped to develop JSONLD, so I guess somebody is able to
> answer.
>
> I have a problem with the standard ways we handle thing resources.
> Afaik. we have 2 standard ways to identify thing resources. The first
> way to use fragment identifiers, so the URI with the fragment
> `/doc#thing` can identify the thing and the URI without the fragment
> `/doc` can identify the document which describes the thing (meta
> document hereafter). The other standard solution that by requesting
> the URI of the thing `/thing` we redirect the request with 301 to the
> URI of the meta document `/doc`.
>
> The problem with these two ways is that none of them provide any
> information about what we were requesting, they just simply give us
> the meta document, and we have no clue that we were requesting a thing
> and getting a meta document or we were just requesting a regular
> document. There can be scenarios where this difference really matters
> (at least I just have one).
>
> I was thinking about how to distinguish things from documents and I
> came up with a few possible solutions:
>
> a.)
>
> Don't use any of these standard approaches. Use 204 no content by
> requesting /thing and return a Link header to the meta document. I am
> not sure whether this meets the standards related to things, but I
> guess it doesn't.
>
> b.)
>
> Use the XHR fetch API, which contains manual redirect. This is
> cumbersome, since having a thing resource is not the only cause of
> HTTP redirection and the feature is not widely supported yet anyways.
>
> c.)
>
> Make a convention about the meta document. For example the meta
> document should contain a json-ld response with meta-document type.
> Another way to check whether the @id is the same URI we requested, or
> the rdf:about is the URI we requested. I don't think any of these are
> general solutions.
>
> d.)
>
> Make a convention about the link to the thing. So for example the
> thing link have /aThing link relation, while the documents have
> something different. This is not a general solution as well, for
> example in my case I need the link relation to describe the
> relationship between the document and the thing. Another problem that
> I don't know whether we are talking about the link before requesting
> the URI. Adding code to check that would make server side code much
> heavier, and I won't be able to add this info to every hypermedia
> type, e.g. by markdown I don't know a way of adding properties to
> hyperlink.
>
> My best hope is a.), but maybe you have a better solution, which meets
> the standard as well.
>

Received on Saturday, 3 December 2016 21:24:08 UTC