W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > January 2014

Re: Multiple resource representations during LDPC POST (5.4.1)

From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:33:22 -0500
To: "public-ldp@w3.org" <public-ldp@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF051A333B.9D35A8FA-ON85257C59.0053DFCC-85257C59.00557436@us.ibm.com>
Martynas, this feels like violent agreement ;-)

> How can the client submit the complete representation in a single RDF
> graph (which here is the entity body), if a resource representation is
> potentially constructed from multiple graphs, as my DESCRIBE example
> shows? ...

SPARQL DESCRIBE's output is an RDF graph, according to [1].  So "what's 
the problem?" if LDP's create-via-POST takes as input an RDF graph?
If you're looking to preserve provenance, I think you're beyond Turtle and 
into other syntaxes like Trig.  LDP requires Turtle but certainly allows 
others, so Trig and friends can play.

> ... Or is it somehow partial representation that is meant here? Or
> does the LDP prohibit multi-graph representations?

<chorus> LDP requires Turtle but certainly allows others, so Trig and 
friends can play. </chorus> ;-)
I don't know that we have an explicit MAY on others, but I suspect we do. 
Since the default reasoning is "in the absence of a MUST NOT, you can do 
anything" silence implicitly allows it; people sometimes object to 
explicit MAYs that convey the equivalent, but how far you take each is 
somewhat a matter of editorial taste.



[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#QueryForms


Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2014 15:33:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:03:11 UTC