Aggregate/Container

Changing the subject line, as this topic does not affect the intuitive requirement.

On 7 Mar 2013, at 22:09, Roger Menday <Roger.Menday@uk.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> 
> On 4 Mar 2013, at 09:24, Henry Story wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 1 Mar 2013, at 19:40, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> > From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> 
>>> > To: Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>, 
>>> > Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org 
>>> > Date: 03/01/2013 05:41 AM 
>>> > Subject: Re: The Intuitive/ Requirement 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > On 27 Feb 2013, at 17:22, Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es> wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > ...
>>> > >> yes, but I think this could just as well lead one to the opposite
>>> > >> conclusion, namely that the aggregation model presented recently is
>>> > >> not intuitive.
>>> > > 
>>> > > Well, but aggregation is what we already have in the current 
>>> > version of the specification (Editor's Draft 27 February 2013).
>>> > 
>>> > Oh, I am surprised that was put in, with so little support. I'll need to 
>>> > look at that closer. But I am not sure it is incompatible with the 
>>> > prosposition
>>> > put forward here as argued below...
>>> > 
>>> > ...
>>> 
>>> Hi Henry, 
>>> Aggregation was added to the spec as a follow up to the decision to close Issue 34 on February 11. I see no evidence of having "little support". What are you referring to? 
>>> 
>>> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/meeting/2013-02-11#resolution_3

I was thinking about the vote at
http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/meeting/2013-02-25#line0222

"use John's proposed ontology with Aggregation renamed as AggregateContainer, Composition as CompositeContainer, and better documentation"

which had 3 +1 and 8 +0 s
 
which I don't consider to be anywhere close to overwhelming support.

I think this made its way into the section 5.1here:

[[
The model for containers follow that of two distinct types: composition and aggregation. Due to composition constraints, the lifespan of the member resource must match that of its container and it a member resource can not be a member of more than one container. For both types of containers, members are o

nly added by using POST, which both creates the resource and inserts a membership triple. A request to delete a composite container that has members, will result in all the members and the container itself will be deleted. A member resource is removed from a composite container by deleting the resource directly, which removes the membership triple from the container.
]]


>> 
>> I some how had a feeling that what was being voted for at that point was 
>> for it be adopted as a point of discussion to focus on. I did not think that it was 
>> going into the spec as is.   
> 
> My understanding:  going forward with John's proposal was a way of breaking the issue-34 deadlock. It's not like we really agreed to it - It was just a new way of talking about it. As I see it, now that the text is written up in the draft, it is time to do as Arnaud said and review the text and raise new issues, etc. 

This seems to me to raise a few questions. If I look at the ontology I see that

ldp:AggregateContainer     a :Class;
              :subClassOf ldp:Container .
ldp:CompositeContainer     a :Class;
               :subClassOf ldp:Container .

Some questions that occur to me:

Are there containers that can be both AggregateContainer and CompositeContainer or are
these non overlapping classes? Ie: is it true or false that

   ldp:AggregateContainer owl:disjoingWith ldp:CompositeContainer .

(1) If false, then how would one know when deleting one of these containers, which of the members was also going to be deleted?
(2) Can one transform an ldp:AggregateContainer into an ldp:CompositeContainer?
If so the question the question (1) becomes even more pressing

Henry

> 
> Roger
> 
>> 
>> Anyway, I don't think this is incompatible with the point I am putting forward here. 
>> 
>>> --
>>> Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Social Web Architect
>> http://bblfish.net/
>> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/