- From: <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 19:16:37 +0100
- To: "Kingsley (Uyi) Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2014 18:17:42 UTC
At the last meeting there was a resolution to move back to the previous positon on container hierarchies, the position called "the minimal consensual position" in https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ContainerHierarchy But that wiki page shows how the minimal consensual position we have currently + the decisions we have previously come to lead to hierarchy IndirectContainer DirectContainer BasicContainer In RDF subclass relations DO NOT mean dependence of one subclass on another. You can easily deprecate classes without subclasses or superclasses without this leading to legacy issues. All the subclass relations mean is that you cannot have objects that are in one class and not the superclass as shown by the picture https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ContainerHierarchy#LDP-BC_.3C:_LDP-DC_.3C:_LDP-IC_.3C:_LDPC So I think it is misleading in fact to now show the classes as having no relation to each other when we know they do. Henry
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2014 18:17:42 UTC