- 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