- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 14:23:18 -0400
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51A8EA96.6060606@openlinksw.com>
On 5/31/13 12:48 PM, Henry Story wrote: > > On 31 May 2013, at 18:11, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com > <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote: > >> Hi Henry, >> >> I think the proposed text below has several issues: >> >> "relates an LDP Container to the elements it contains, ie LDPRs that >> were created through this LDPC or that act as if they had been" >> >> 1. LDPCs aren't limited to containing LDPRs. They can contain any >> types of resources, including binary ones. >> 2. LDPCs aren't limited to containing resources that are created from >> the LDPC. Although the end of the sentence opens up to that >> possibility I think the text unnecessarily implies a tie that just >> doesn't exist. > > agree. > >> >> I would suggest something like this instead: >> >> "relates an LDP Container to the resources it contains". > > Yes, I was hesitant about that way of expressing things, because it > seemed nearly circular. > >> >> I think you're right that having an LDP specific predicate would >> prevent any ambiguity. Sadly, this is a good example of why it is so >> difficult to reuse existing vocabularies. > > Reuse is often done by inference. So one could add to the definition > > ldp:contains rdf:subPropertyOf rdf:member . > > Then one gets the benefits of aligning intuitions of those who have > understood rdf:member relation. > But yes, in this case we use the concept ldp:contains in a very > specific way, and rdf:member covers > much more ground. +1 BTW -- it's rdfs:member :-) Kingsley > >> >> -- >> Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group >> >> >> >> >> From: "Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Issue Tracker" >> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org <mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org>> >> To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, >> Date: 05/31/2013 02:43 AM >> Subject: ldp-ISSUE-79 (ldp:contains): ldp:contains >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> ldp-ISSUE-79 (ldp:contains): ldp:contains >> >> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/79 >> >> Raised by: Henry Story >> On product: >> >> replace all (most) references of rdf:member in the spec to >> ldp:contains . >> >> ldp:contains a rdf:Property; >> :comment "relates an LDP Container to the elements it contains, ie >> LDPRs that were created through this LDPC or that act as if they had >> been"; >> :domain ldp:Container; >> :range ldp:Resource . >> >> The advantage of using this relation is that: >> - it is more specific than rdfs:member which can be applied much >> more widely than LDPCs >> - it does not require the client to know that { <> a ldp:Container >> }, and so does not need to >> parse through all the triples before it can start interpreting >> the meaning of an rdf:member . >> - LDPRs that wish to refer to their LDPCs can do this in one >> relation with >> { <.> ldp:contains <> . } this otherwise requires two relations >> { <.> a ldp:Container; rdf:member <> } >> - ( very minor: it may reduce the need to import the rdf namespace ) >> >> >> >> >> > > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 18:23:41 UTC