- From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 14:47:57 +0200
- To: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <nmihindu@fi.upm.es>
- Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On 22 May 2013, at 10:06, Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <nmihindu@fi.upm.es> wrote: > > 3. we correctly make the distinction between information resource and thing talked about > > Thank you very much for pointing this out. So if I change the example like the following, will it address your concern #3 ? > > ----------------------- Model 1 -------------------------------------- > > </app/BugTracker> a ldp:Container, bt:BugTracker ; > ldp:membershipPredicate bt:hasProductDescription ; > bt:hasProductDescription </app/BugTracker/ProductA> . > ------ > </app/BugTracker/ProductA> a ldp:Container, bt:ProductDescription; > ldp:membershipPredicate bt:hasBugReport ; > foaf:primaryTopic <#p>; > dcterms:title "The Ace Product Page"; > bt:hasBugReport </app/BugTracker/ProductA/Bug1> . > > <#p> a bt:Product . > ------ > </app/BugTracker/ProductA/Bug1> a bt:BugReport; > foaf:primaryTopic <#b> ; > dcterms:title "Product A crashes when shutting down."; > dcterms:creator </users/johndoe#me>; > dcterms:created "2013-05-05T10:00"^^xsd:dateTime . > > <#b> a bt:Bug; > bt:relatedProduct </app/BugTracker/ProductA#p>; > bt:isInState "New" . > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- yes. Here you distinguish correctly between the products and the page about the products, as well as between the bug and the page about the bug. Now presumably the following rule applies: { </app/BugTracker> bt:hasProductDescription ?member . } => { </app/BugTracker> rdf:member ?member . } That is bt:hasProductDescription rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:member . Whatever. In either case it seems we should be able to add to your </app/BugTracker> graph <BugTracker> rdfs:member <BugTracker/ProductA> . and to your </app/BugTracker/ProductA> graph the relation <ProductA> rdfs:member <ProductA/Bug1> . So now the question is simply, what is the UC&R case for adding the membershipPredicate relation? I have the following hypothesis: 1. by specifying that membership relation you are developing a way to restrict what can be POSTed to the LDPC and hence what is contained in the container. I imagine that somewhere your definition of bt:hasProductDescription one finds that bt:hasProductDescription a rdfs:Property; rdfs:range bt:ProductDescription . or perhaps some restriction that says the same thing but specifically when the subject is that particular container. 2. You are trying to develop a simple language for making clear the consequences of POSTing to the container. You want to say: by posting here you are creating a new Bug for product p that will be tied via the bt:hasProductDescription to this container. I think clarity about the role of membershipPredicate would be very helpful in understanding its position in the spec. Have I guessed the reasons for the existence of membershipProperty correctly? Henry Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Wednesday, 22 May 2013 12:48:44 UTC