- From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 20:01:01 +0100
- To: Arnaud LeHors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Linked Data Platform WG <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On 12 Dec 2013, at 19:20, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote: > While true, it's been pointed out before, several times, that this would fall short of addressing the use case at hand: allowing one to define a container over existing data by leveraging a domain specific vocabulary. I am not sure I understand. The use case is I suppose that one should be able to publish existing data using LDP. It can't be a requirement to publish the data in an LDPC in particular. It seems obvious that one can publish any data in an LDPR ( that is not an LDPC of course ). So the use case is satisfied anyway. Can anyone explain in particular why the data MUST be placed in an LDPC? > It's this new relationship that should be inferred. > -- > Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group > > > Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote on 12/12/2013 09:27:28 AM: > > > From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> > > To: Linked Data Platform WG <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, > > Date: 12/12/2013 09:31 AM > > Subject: Issue-89, proposal 3: Duplication of triples & inferencing > > > > Part 3 of Issue-89 creates a relation ldp:propertiesOnlyResource > > to allow an LDPC to point in its header to the "membership properties". > > The reason for this is to avoid so called duplication of triples. > > > > The duplication of triples is an issue mostly for the > > ldp:DirectContainer as is visible for a container such > > as the following > > > > <> a ldp:DirectContainer; > > ldp:containerResource <>; > > ldp:containsRelation m:manages; > > ldp:xyz <doc1>, <doc2>, <doc3> ; > > m:manages <doc1>, <doc2>, <doc3> . > > > > ( I am using ldp:xyz for what alexander in ISSUE-89 calls > > ldp:contains. You can replace it without loss here and > > throughout this e-mail. ) > > > > But according to the rule such as the one used in the Membership wiki [1] > > it would be very easy to determine the "membership triples" using only > > the ldp:xyz relations > > > > PREFIX ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#> > > > > CONSTRUCT { ?subject ?predicate ?object } > > WHERE { > > ?ldpc a ldp:DirectContainer; > > ldp:containerResource ?subject; > > ldp:containsRelation ?predicate; > > > > ?ldpc ldp:xyz ?document . > > BIND (?document AS ?object) # the > > POSTed resource is the member > > } UNION { > > ?ldpc a ldp:DirectContainer; > > ldp:containerResource ?object; > > ldp:containedByRelation ?predicate. # > > ldp:containedByRelation is used > > > > ?ldpc ldp:xyz ?document . > > BIND (?document AS ?object) > > } > > } > > > > In that case duplication is not a problem at all, > > since a client could just infer the "membership triples" > > from the ldp:xyz ones using that query. > > > > On the other hand if such a rule is not true, and cannot > > be written out, then there is no duplication, since the > > "membership triples" are in fact different triples, and > > have no necessary relation to the ldp:xyz ones. > > > > But then this does give one a good reason for having them in a > > different possibly server managed resource. > > > > > > > > > > [1]in the Membership wiki "Determining the membership triples to be > > added when a new member > > is created" http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ > > Membership#Determining_the_membership_triples_to_be_added_when_a_new_member_is_created > > > > > > Social Web Architect > > http://bblfish.net/ > > > > Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2013 19:01:36 UTC