W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Discovery/Affordances (Issue-32/Issue-57)

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:02:39 +0200
Cc: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>, public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <FF08513E-4699-4219-AC0C-5C9DBBB0104E@bblfish.net>
To: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>

On 13 Jun 2013, at 17:41, Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org> wrote:

> On 06/13/2013 11:31 AM, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> [snip]
>> * Important Note: As I indicated before the spec doesn't currently
>> require LDPRs to be typed with something like ldp:Resource.
> 
> I don't see how this would be possible anyway, because an LDPR does not have to be an RDF graph.

There are many options here. One simple one is given ISSUE-79's 
ldp:contains relation one could have other resources just state 
in their header the Link relation  equivalent to the Turtle

  <.> lpd:contains <> .

ie, have the resource point to its container. Now that would
happen to also be useful information, as it would allow one
to also find metadata there about the resources.

Henry


> 
> Alexandre.
> 
> 
>> So I think
>> you're missing something if you only want to rely on the RDF content.
>> You wouldn't be able to tell that you're looking at an LDPR.
>> --
>> Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
>> 
>> 
>> Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote on 06/13/2013 07:35:40 AM:
>> 
>> > From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
>> > To: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS,
>> > Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
>> > Date: 06/13/2013 07:46 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Discovery/Affordances (Issue-32/Issue-57)
>> >
>> > On 13 Jun 2013, at 16:20, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote on 06/11/2013 11:36:04 PM:
>> > >
>> > > Ok, so I have spent a day trying to understand what it is that Erik
>> > > Wilde is proposing, and I can
>> > > get nowhere with it. So please can he propose something that is
>> > > coherent and clearly written out
>> > > so that we can have some ability to understand what he wants?
>> > >
>> > > Henry
>> >
>> > Hi Henry,
>> >
>> > Are you referring to the proposal to use a profile? I'm the one
>> > who's made the proposal and I explained both why I made it and what
>> it is.
>> > Let's hope we can use next week's F2F to more effictively
>> > communicate and come to an understanding if not an agreement.
>> >
>> > Ah ok.
>> >
>> > Can you show us the full Link header that you would propose be
>> > used by the Server to show what it is you think needs saying.
>> > This Link header will contain a relation and a value.
>> > What is the value, and what is the relation meant to mean?
>> >
>> > Then it will be easier to see if one can agree to that, and what
>> > the consequences of this is meant to be.
>> >
>> > Henry
>> >
>> > --
>> > Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
>> 
>> >
>> > Social Web Architect
>> > http://bblfish.net/
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 16:03:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:51 UTC