- From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 09:40:51 -0400
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFFDD05A1F.4701AD44-ON85257B63.0048CAAE-85257B63.004B270A@us.ibm.com>
> 1. does the ldp:membershipSubject have to be a document such as <> ? > ( which in the example above is a o:NetWorth ) I'm guessing that by 'document' you mean "a URI that is also, without modification, a valid HTTP request-URI". Under that assumption, no. The membership subject is just a URI, any URI usable as a subject in RDF triples. > Is this [JA: elided example] ok? I think it is. I disagree with Arnaud there, because the triple <meetings/> ldp:membershipSubject <.>; can be restated as <http://example.org/netWorth/nw1/meetings/ ldp:membershipSubject < http://example.org/netWorth/nw1> and I see a triple <> cal:attending <meetings/meet1> . aka <http://example.org/netWorth/nw1> cal:attending << http://example.org/netWorth/nw1/meetings/meet1> . (although the presence of that triple is not itself required per se, it lends credence that what you conveyed and what you intended to convey are consistent) > 2. Would it not be a good thing if a GET on <portrait/> returned the following ... > and of course if <meetings> mentioned its rds:member ? LDP *allows* the server to return 'extra' triples beyond those whose subject matches the HTTP request-URI. I think your intent here is basically to say: would it not be useful of GET on a container always returned the membership triples, regardless of the subject of those triples? Which seems reasonable. Assuming that intent, I would alter your proposed response however to be: # In this context, <> corresponds to http://example.org/netWorth/nw1/portrait/ > <> a ldp:Container; > dcterms:title "The assets of JohnZSmith"; > ldp:membershipSubject <#me>; > ldp:membershipPredicate foaf:depicts. > <http://example.org/netWorth/nw1> foaf:depicts <img1>, <img2> . # changed the subj + predicate vs Henry's original I kept the addition of <img2> here, although I did find its appearance in this response but not in the original confusing. Note that I changed rdfs:member to foaf:depicts in the membership triples to align with your asserted ldp:membershipPredicate . For the same reason, changed the subject of the same triples. > 3. What if I want the object of the relation from the ... This is hard enough to parse with confidence that I think I need to see an example of what you'd like to create. > 4. Can I have a number of different membershipSubjects? Exactly one per LDP container. Your example in #1 shows an example where a single HTTP resource's representation includes multiple (2) containers, and therefore the containers' membership triples can have up to 2 unique membership subjects. Best Regards, John Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
Received on Monday, 6 May 2013 13:41:26 UTC