- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:23:31 -0400
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <517199B3.8080800@openlinksw.com>
On 4/19/13 2:47 PM, Cody Burleson wrote: > I prefer Henry's proposal of using ldp:contains in addition to > ldp:membershipPredicate or ldp:membershipPredicateInverse because it > provides a clear mechanism for properly managing resources. > > Without that, how would I be able to distinguish between resources > that a container actually owns and those which it simply refers to? I > would have to come up with some mechanism and this seems to be a > reasonable one, so why not just go with it and make it standard? > > -- > Cody > +1 A directory has a *containment* relation with resources. A directory also has symbolic link (so to speak) relation with resources. The relations above are inescapable. To ignore them is to introduce regression or undue limitations. Henry explained the logic with clarity. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 19:23:55 UTC