Re: Relationship between filter properties and hydra:supportedProperty (was Re: Filters as views (ISSUE-45))

February 10 2016 11:11 PM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: 
> On 10 Feb 2016 at 16:41, Maxim Kolchin wrote:
> 
>> On 10 Feb 2016 at 14:03, Tomasz Pluskiewicz wrote: 
>>> I'm not sure I understand correctly, but I'd point out that the filter doesn't
>>> necessarily have to directly correspond to you underlying data.
> 
> I think we do want to define filters in such a way that they do directly correspond to the
> underlying data.
> 

I find this dangerous, because in the end Hydra filters would have to work like OData. Also there seems to be an overlap with Triple Pattern Fragments. Both cases assume the client knows a lot about the server-side data structured. 

And again, what if the server actually stores non-RDF data and RDF is used only for resource representations? The above makes no sense in such case and I think it will be a mistake to keep such assumption. Such decoupling is a cornerstone on REST.

Thus for query-string filters the only sane way is to decouple them from data structures. The template mapping property would define the semantics of the possible values (such as geo:lat is a real number that -90 >= lat >= 90) so that the client can produce an appropriate UI.

Received on Thursday, 11 February 2016 09:52:38 UTC