- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 22:22:47 +0100
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
On 15 Feb 2016 at 21:40, Ruben Verborgh wrote: On 15 Feb 2016 at 20:36, Tomasz Pluskiewicz wrote: >> In its place I would prefer to tell the client what value the parameter expects. >> This is more like "parameter q take a FreeTextQuery as input". > > Or, alternatively: freeTextQuery is a way of matching, > just like "exact equality (or not specified)" is the current default way of matching. Yep, we probably have to revisit freeTextQuery to match the design with come up in the course of the current filter discussions. On 14 Feb 2016 at 22:08, Karol Szczepański wrote: > I think this issue was raised several times as indeed the current spec > doesn't say what client MUST understand. Currently we need to use either > pure RDFS/OWL descriptions (i.e. ranges and domains for properties), but > this isn't very convenient way and requires client to have a reasoner > onboard. There is also no consensus whether we shall use any other > dictionary (SHACL appeared here several times). > > In general I agree with you that these decisions should take place some time > in future as I struggle to address these issues in my projects. We will discuss this when we discuss operations [1]. I'm afraid we need to spend a few more cycles on collections first. Cheers, Markus [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra/2015Oct/0085.html -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 22 February 2016 21:23:17 UTC