- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 20:15:50 +0000
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On 04/01/13 21:55, Steve Speicher wrote: >> IBM - what alternatives were considered for containership? >> > > (Assume you are wanting the background on the member submission on this) > > It would be hard for me to summarize the many discussions that > occurred around this, especially in this email thread. We were also > watching RDF WG was considering in this area ISSUE-24 > http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/24 > > Therefore there didn't appear to be a clear construct that we should > use directly or augment. > > ...snip... May I ask a specific question? Why this approach, using ldp:membershipPredicate P? I see no advantage over having a fixed well-known property, and harm with unnecessary difficult for access/querying. (I can see why rdfs:member is a bad choice) Andy
Received on Sunday, 6 January 2013 20:16:20 UTC