- From: Karol Szczepański <karol.szczepanski@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 20:28:00 +0100
- To: "Maxim Kolchin" <kolchinmax@gmail.com>, "Deian Tabakov" <DTabakov@slb.com>
- Cc: "Dietrich Schulten" <ds@escalon.de>, "Hydra" <public-hydra@w3.org>
Hi Maxim Your suggestions are correct. Still, I believe the issue is that we still haven't decide which path should we go. Indeed using RDFS/OWL constructs is troublesome from client point of view. >From the other hand, using SHACL or VoID (and possible other vocabs) enforces client to know more and more which complicates things. Hydra doesn't say excplicitely what client MUST understand in this matter in order to perform these tasks. From my perspective (active coder with pragmatic point of view) it grows to a threat that using Hydra won't be easy as there will be always something extra added that client will need to understand in order to discover the API and let the server drive it correctly. Best Karol
Received on Monday, 8 February 2016 19:27:54 UTC