- From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 14:14:22 +0200
- To: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On 18 May 2013, at 13:00, "Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: > ldp-ISSUE-70 (simple LDPCs): simple LDPCs [Linked Data Platform core] > > http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/70 > > Raised by: Henry Story > On product: Linked Data Platform core > > We need to explore if there is a way of solving the use cases we have with only simple LDPCs. > Simple LDPCs would act nearly like directories on a file system: > > - they can list the members > - optionally metadata about the members (creation/update time, author, summary, quoted content ) > - optionally the type of graphs that can be posted to the LDPC > > An LDPC restricted to this would be something that could be shipped with web servers by > default and would not require any ontology enginneer with advanced owl reasoning knowledge > to verify its correctness. > > Henry Below is an example of how one can fill in the section "Keeping Track of Personal and Business Relationships" http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp-ucr/#keeping-track-of-personal-and-business-relationships which I am working on myself. Which Use Cases do people think cannot be solved with a simple LDPC? Here is an example: 0. presupositions The collection http://myserver.net/joe/ has been set up and only joe's client has access to that directory. 1. Joe publishes his card by POSTing the following to the collection ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . @prefix cert: <http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/cert#> . @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> . <#me> foaf:name "Your Name"; foaf:knows <http://bblfish.net/people/henry/card#me> ; cert:key [ a cert:RSAPublicKey; cert:exponent 65537 ; cert:modulus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xsd:hexBinary; ] . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ as a result a GET on <http://myserver.net/joe/> reads ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <> a ldp:Container; rdf:member <card> . <card> foaf:maker <card#me>; atom:updated "2013-05-18T15:32:01Z"^^xsd:dateTime . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2. Perhaps later Joe wishes to publish a collection of pictures, so he can create a container for pictures by POSTing with the header "Slug: pix" the container ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <> a ldp:Container; acceptContent "image/*" . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ( Here we define the restriction of mime types one can post in terms of a yet undefined relation acceptContent . I am not saying that is the right way to do things, but one should consider it) This creates the container and a GET on <http://myserver.net/joe/> reads ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <> a ldp:Container; rdf:member <card>, <pix/> . <card> foaf:maker <card#me>; atom:updated "2013-05-18T15:32:01Z"^^xsd:dateTime . <pix/> a ldp:Container; acceptContent "image/*" . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3. It is easy to see how to POST pictures to the <pix/> container. Pictures can have mime type relations to describe them, so clients can know what mime type they prefer. Perhaps after such a POST the <pix/> container says: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <> a ldp:Container; acceptContent "image/*" . rdf:member <mugshot1> . <mugshot1> mime "image/jpeg","image/gif" ; atom:updated "2013-05-18T15:35:37Z"^^xsd:dateTime . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4. Now having posted that the user wants to add that relation to his card so he PATCHES his </joe/card> to add the relation <#me> foaf:depiction <pix/mugshot1> . Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Saturday, 18 May 2013 12:14:53 UTC