- From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 22:42:05 +0200
- To: Sam Goto <goto@google.com>, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- CC: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>
On 09/22/2014 09:41 PM, Sam Goto wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 1:56 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ > <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org <mailto:perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>> > wrote: > > On 09/21/2014 10:44 PM, Sam Goto wrote: > > InteractAction was meant for interactions between people-people or > > people-organizations. I don't think it would fit. > > > > You could try to make a case for some intersection with UpdateAction, > > but I think that starting separately and merging afterwards seems > > reasonable too (I.e. making a distinction on operations on devices > > versus data/collections). > > I have impression that we again face differences between actions > performed on *abstract things* and operations performed on *web > resources* > > IMO schema:UpdateAction with sub types tries to cover operations on *web > resources* (looks to me like CRUD), while almost all the rest looks like > actions on *abstract things* > > > Actions are applicable to a lot of different objects, "abstract things" > versus "web resources" is just one way to slice it. What problem > specifically are you trying to solve/clarify? And, is that problem > isomorphic to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTPRange-14? I know that my comments may sound like going down the HTTPRange-14 'rathole'. I hope that we have much simpler case here to clarify. Many web developers know CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete). In schema.org I see UpdateAction with AddAction, DeleteAction, ReplaceAction as something pretty close to that. Those actions also seem to me like operations on *web resources*. Also to my understanding Hydra focuses on those as well (hydra:CreateResourceOperation, hydra:ReplaceResourceOperation, hydra:DeleteResourceOperation) Pretty much all the rest of schema.org/Action sub types look like actions on *abstract things* including CreateAction and ReadAction. Last week I suggested in Hydra issue to use * Operation for *web resources* * Action for *abstract things* https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/2#issuecomment-55533955 This way schema.org could also model CRUD operations with * CreateOperation * ReadOperation * UpdateOperation * DeleteOperation While other actions on *abstract things* would stay unchanged. BTW if that sounds like something with even slight possibly of making sense I would propose to use term *ControlAction* for Viki's proposal instead of *OperateAction* (operation/action) I still need to work with some more real life examples to wrap my mind around it. Next week we should work in Social Web WG on *potential actions* plus *past activities*. It may include scenarios like: "Alice took photo of Steve & Jane, and posted this photo on Bob's wall and Beth's wall". So Steve and Jane would have *potential action* 'Photograph', which would yield *past activity* which result - a photograph - gets published on Bob's wall and Beth's wall, those walls also need appropriate *potential actions* to post on them... Should I reply with further findings in this exploration on this thread or maybe better to move this sub-conversation to dedicated issue on github?
Received on Monday, 22 September 2014 20:44:21 UTC