W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > April 2013

Re: Recommendation for specification edits

From: Cody Burleson <cody.burleson@base22.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:22:18 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJM-RdrbzjVgs=m1+rz2EUOB-bzYAO5D1P0gRjKkQGtHQCBqnw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Linked Data Platform WG <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Hi, Roger

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Roger Menday
<roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com>wrote:
>
>
> However, I would question if a LDPC is actually a LDPR.
> I think these could be different things.
>

I was just going off of what is stated in 5.2 General section:

5.2.1 LDPC servers *MUST* also be conformant LDPR servers. A Linked Data
Platform Container *MUST* also be a conformant Linked Data Platform
Resource.

My main goal for those definitions has not been to question whether that
(section 5.2.1) is right or wrong, but simply to provide true, concise
definitions for the terminology section rather than say things like "HTTP
resource that conforms to the simple lifecycle patterns and conventions in
the LDPRs section." To me, that kind of reference negates the whole reason
for having an introductory terminology section.

That being said, to me, it really makes sense that an LDPC is an LDPR if
you consider that this definition for an LDPR is true:


"An HTTP resource that can be represented by RDF, which is managed within
or served from a Linked Data Platform."

If you are thinking of a modeling perspective (e.g. an ontology model), and
you are suggesting that an LDPC may not be a subclass of Container, I was
going to say that, in that case, you might have a point. At the moment,
however, both the Turtle and RDF/XML models published here do in fact
define ldp:Container as a subclass or ldp:Resource:

http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp.rdf

- Cody
Received on Monday, 15 April 2013 18:23:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:46 UTC