- From: Roger Menday <Roger.Menday@uk.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 13:26:51 +0100
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- CC: Linked Data Platform Working Group <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <85BAC82E-78FD-4070-A4DE-AF1BACEFD86E@uk.fujitsu.com>
hi Henry, >> >> At the end of the teleconf yesterday, you were leading us towards a straw-poll around the membershipXX (and related) issues. I thought that might be quite interesting. I don't think it is simply a case of is there is a fixed name (or not) for the relationship between things inside boxes. >> >> My characterisation: >> >> 1. Managing Documents (about Things) in Boxes >> 2. Use Boxes to help managing Things (which might be inside Documents) > > Web Interactions are always about interactions with information resources, be they > LDPCs ( boxes ) and LDPRs ( usually Documents ) > > Documents speak about things. Things may nor may not be inside boxes. Certainly most > things are neither LDPRs or LDPCs. There are apples, oranges, spiders, cats, meetings, > asteroids, that have been around way before LDPCs have been. These things are not > managed by LDPCs: Information about them is collected in LDPRs. > > So 1. Managing documents in LDPCs, given that the documents speak about things > gives you all the tools you need to speak about everything in the known universe > and beyond. LDP is in the end very simple. I hope so ... No.1 is kind of like LDized-ATOM. No.2 is closer to the notion of read/write LD. I would like LDP to provide the protocol basis for manipulating Things. That why I say that Boxes are just a means to an end (rather than the end themselves). Boxes just contain the membershipTriples. > The use case people are trying to solve with the propertyXX relations I think needs to > be worked out and described carefully. The the idea would be to find some patterns > that allow you to satisfy the use case of adding relations in connected LDPRs when creating an LDPR. > > >> >> I believe that no.2 is where more applications are. > > Since you can do everyting with 1, you can't claim there are more applications in 2. That's true. So one can do everything with both models :) Which one is the mainstream developer going to be happier with ? Roger p.s. you didn't register you entry for the straw-poll. Can I assume it's no.1 ... ?
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 12:27:22 UTC