Re: ldp-ISSUE-73 (rdf:member): LDPCs to list all their rdf:member [Linked Data Platform core]

> I'll edit it to 
> [[
> An LDPC MUST list all the resources created in it as a relation 
> between the container and the created LDPR via
> the rdf:member relation.
> ]]
> if that helps.

'created' is one problem.  Think of the PUT/PATCH cases where existing 
resources are added to containers, they are not container-created ones.
'LDPR' is another.  Members MAY be LDPRs.  "Think of the binaries!" ;-)
We've opened, discussed, and resolved issues on those with your 
participation, no?  I'm not sensing intent to re-open those if I try to 
read between the lines, so please be explicit if you do intend to re-open 
them.  Otherwise I'll assume this is just imprecision of the same ilk as 
omitting a final / in examples' URIs.
To move this along, I'll counter with this rewording :

An LDPC MUST list all the resources in it as a relation between the 
container and the member resource via the rdf:member relation.

That's my best guess at expressing your intent w/o restricting it to less 
than what the spec currently licenses.

> If you look further in Model 2, 

Ok, will loop back around on that when I get time.

> which he put together with you,

Another unfounded (and incorrect) assumption.

> Now issue-73 is not arguing that one should remove those 
> relations. 

That is my understanding (at least as of yesterday - not sure exactly when 
that became clear, so if I said otherwise before it's evidence of the 
conversation clarifying intent).  I actually helped explain that to 
someone else yesterday offline.

> I'll open an issue on
> the misleading nameing of rdf:membershipXXX perhaps, so that these 
> remain clearly seperated.

Makes good sense.

Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario

Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 13:33:58 UTC