- From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:51:32 -0700
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote: > Yes. Btw, just checking: is this (that the description of the construct > should be the one of the annotation) specified in the spec? It is now! >>>>> 2. Mapping with RDF container classes. >> I guess that I'm hesitant to promote Bag and Alt. If we recommend >> them and they go away, then we're in a mess. >> I think the relationship between the OA and rdf classes is (now) >> clear. We should (must!) of course reassess this in any future >> Working Group with the RDF 1.1 WG. > > Yes, and I think the best way not to forget about it is to note the subclass > mapping :-) In the description we now talk about "equivalent classes", but it's not formalized. Added this to the editor's note in oa:List. > Even in the (really unlikely) case that Bag and Alt would be deprecated, it > wouldn't hurt OA so much. We're just sub-classing these classes, not > re-using them directly. True, and adding the oa:default property to Choice I think is both useful and helps justify the classes. So ... I'm not against oa:Choice rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Alt and oa:Composite rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Bag, but I am against it for oa/rdf:List (as per previous reasoning). Other opinions? >>> By the way you could treat my suggestion for the axioms "bridging" >>> between rdf:first/rdf:rest and oa:item. >> >> Yes... it would reduce the number of mandatory triples, at the expense >> of some additional client side processing. >> I'm not sure that we have a good enough understanding of the field at >> this stage to make a clear determination either way as to which is >> better. > > I'd argue that mentioning the axioms is useful even if the data producers > are the ones in charge of applying them... Could you write up a paragraph or so for them? Agreed that it would be good to be clear, and I'm not sure that I would do them justice. >> I think that everyone is happy with an Editor's Note now and >> re-assessing later if/when necessary? > > Yes, but I'm in favour of a quite complete Editor's note ;-)\ :) Will fix based on the decision about subclassing Bag and Alt. Rob
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2013 16:52:03 UTC