- From: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <nmihindu@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 19:31:31 +0100
- To: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 18:32:23 UTC
Hi Steve, On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Steve Battle <steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk>wrote: > > > My proposal is then: > > 1) To specify ldp:contains (alternatively ldp:owns, ldp:manages) as the > DEFAULT composition predicate. See section 5.2.5 > 2) Rename ldp:membershipPredicate as ldp:compositionPredicate, to clarify > that this is refers to composition rather than aggregation. > 3) Change EXAMPLE 1 to use ldp:contains, and EXAMPLE 5 to use something > other than rdfs:member > Yes, I think in several previous threads people agreed that rdfs:member might not be the best predicate to use for composition and it could lead to confusions. IMHO, we could open a separate issue (as this can be settled independently from ISSUE-37) on the tracker to "change the default predicate of an LDPC" to any of the three that the WG agrees on. This way it would be easier to see whether people agree or not with this proposal and also we could do the necessary modifications to the specification if people agree. Best Regards, Nandana
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 18:32:23 UTC