Re: ldp-ISSUE-62 (siblings): Creating Sibling Containers [Linked Data Platform core]

hi John, 

> > What happens if I want to record some new/other information about a Networth resource ? Then I need a way to create a new container. 
> 
> I think that's a non sequitir.  The reason you'd need a new container is if you needed a new HTTP interaction point with LDPC semantics.


But, that is what I need [*] - a new HTTP interaction point with LDPC semantics !!
- e.g. a container called 'options' (or some other financial term), which has some stated membershipSubject, and which operates like the asset or liability ones. 


>  I can record info about a NetWorth member anywhere (at any URL) using RDF.... including on a different server. 
> 
> 
> > Sibling containers share a common membershipSubject. For example, the Asset and Liability containers are siblings 'inside' a Networth resource.
> 
> LDP does not constrain the storage ("inside").  It gives you no guarantee that the state of /nw1 includes the triples in the container resources; nor does it impede doing so.  It's logical/common sense enough to do so, just not guaranteed by the spec
> 


Wrt "inside": 
Every LDPR has a representation with a number of triples.
An LDPC is a subset of those triples - same-subject, same-predicate. 
That's what I mean by 'inside' - maybe I should've used 'subset'. 

Anyway, I understand that by de-referencing /nw1, you are *not* guaranteed to see the triples about the container resources. Infact this was one of motivators for raising issue-51. If we resolve issue-51 by specifying that there should be links from a resource to its containers, then it this lack of guarantee doesn't matter. 



> This appears to devolve back to "how do I create containers".  We've had conversations about that before, and had some level of consensus IIRC that the spec would remain silent and the primer/deployment document might well show how the "spec as it is" could be used by implementations to create containers.
> 

I've been implementing LDP recently, and this is definitely an issue. 

*IF* we choose to resolve this issue with PUTting a new LDPC resource, then I can see that the resolution would be something for the deployment guide. 

But, this sibling case isn't the same as the container-creating-another-container case.

thanks, 
Roger 


[*] I -really- think that in most cases the server will decide what I need, and offer it to me. And as a dumb client, I should just follow that lead. 

> Best Regards, John
> 
> Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages 
> Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From:        "Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> 
> To:        public-ldp-wg@w3.org, 
> Date:        04/29/2013 11:32 AM 
> Subject:        ldp-ISSUE-62 (siblings): Creating Sibling Containers [Linked Data Platform core] 
> 
> 
> 
> ldp-ISSUE-62 (siblings): Creating Sibling Containers [Linked Data Platform core]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/62
> 
> Raised by: Roger Menday
> On product: Linked Data Platform core
> 
> 
> Sibling containers share a common membershipSubject. For example, the Asset and Liability containers are siblings 'inside' a Networth resource. 
> 
> What happens if I want to record some new/other information about a Networth resource ? Then I need a way to create a new container. 
> 
> A simple solution might be to PUT a new sibling Container to some explicit address. Alternatively, as the LDPC siblings are form a container, POSTing to a networth could also do this sibling creation. This has the implication that every LDPR is an LDPC ...
> 
> see also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Apr/0068.html for another example. 
> 
> 
> 
>