Re: Networth example with ldp:contains

I might be wrong, but, is the case you describe an alias for a SimpleContainer with a renamed ldp:contains ... ? 

On 14 Jan 2014, at 18:36, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:

> As Alexandre alluded to there is still one case where the duplication occurs: this is when the containerResource/memberSubject of a DirectContainer is the container itself. You end up with something like this: 
> 
> <> a ldp:DirectContainer, 
>         ldp:containerResource <>, 
>         ldp:containsRelation ex:member, 
>         ex:member <m1>, 
>         ldp:contains <m1>, 
>         ex:member <m2>, 
>         ldp:contains<m2>. 
> --
> Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
> 
> 
> Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote on 01/14/2014 04:38:33 AM:
> 
> > From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> 
> > To: Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com>, 
> > Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Working Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org> 
> > Date: 01/14/2014 04:40 AM 
> > Subject: Re: Networth example with ldp:contains 
> > 
> > 
> > On 13 Jan 2014, at 18:39, Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > hello, 
> > > 
> > > Following up on the long call this afternoon ...
> > > 
> > > In the following two examples, where/why is it necessary to use 
> > client preference for materializing ldp:contains ? 
> > > 
> > > 1. 'DirectContainer' case (such as a Networth in the spec): 
> > > 
> > > <>
> > >   a o:NetWorth;
> > >   o:netWorthOf <http://example.org/users/JohnZSmith>;
> > >   o:asset 
> > >      <assetContainer/a1>,
> > >      <assetContainer/a2>;
> > >   o:liability 
> > >      <liabilityContainer/l1>,
> > >      <liabilityContainer/l2>,
> > >      <liabilityContainer/l3>.
> > > 
> > > <assetContainer/>
> > >   a ldp:DirectContainer;
> > >   dcterms:title "The assets of JohnZSmith";
> > >   ldp:containerResource <>;
> > >   ldp:containsRelation o:asset.
> > > 
> > > <liabilityContainer/>
> > >   a ldp:DirectContainer;
> > >   dcterms:title "The liabilities of JohnZSmith";
> > >   ldp:containerResource <>;
> > >   ldp:containsRelation o:liability.
> > > 
> > > POSTing to  the LDPCs (<assetContainer/>, <liabilityContainer/>) 
> > creates new Assets and Liabilities. 
> > > The response has the Location: of these newly created resources.
> > > If I GET the LDPR, I see domain-specific <asset> and <liabilities> triples.
> > > If I GET the LDPC, I see ldp:contains triples. 
> > 
> > yes, I think that is the best way to do things: Have the LDPC list 
> > its ldp:contains relations, and have other resources ( eg the Networth 
> > one shown above) contain the "membership triples". 
> > 
> > The advantage here is that there is no duplication and each resource
> > does what it is meant for. Your Networth resource above lists the 
> > Networth facts, and the LDPCs <assetContainer/> and <liabilityContainer/>
> > list the ldp:contains relations. A client that did not deal with LDP would
> > probably not end up in <assetContainer/> or <liabilityContainer/>, but
> > just follow the domain specific o: ontology .
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 2. 'SimpleContainer' case:
> > > 
> > > <>
> > >   a o:Box, ldp:SimpleContainer;
> > >   o:boxOwner <http://example.org/users/JohnZSmith>;
> > >   ldp:contains
> > >      <item/m1>,
> > >      <item/m2>;
> > > 
> > > In this case, the LDPR and LDPC are the same thing, and by the 
> > ldp:contains triples are found when GETting. 
> > > There isn't a duplication issue. 
> > 
> > exactly.
> > 
> > :-)
> > 
> > > 
> > > Roger 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > Social Web Architect
> > http://bblfish.net/
> > 
> >