- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 09:36:21 +0100
- To: "Breslin, John" <john.breslin@nuigalway.ie>
- Cc: "Michael Hausenblas" <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, <public-rdf@w3.org>, <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, "W3C SWIG Mailing-List" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi John, > You want to point to the set of replies? You could bundle the Posts or sioct:Comments into a Container or Thread. > > But I guess what you need is a has_reply_set property or has_replies / has_comments. You lose the thread structure though if they are all in one container… That’s indeed what this specific example needs. But I’m more looking for a general solution that solves this problem for all collection cases. It would just not be practical to create a plural property and a singular property for *all* properties out there. So what would be the generic “has_replies” solution? Best, Ruben > > On 1 Mar 2012, at 08:22, "Ruben Verborgh" <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be> wrote: > >> Hi Michael, >> >>> Are you aware of http://sioc-project.org/ …? >> >> Thanks for your reply. I’m aware of the SIOC project. >> As far as I can see, they do not have a solution for this problem. While they have the :has_reply predicate, they do not have a mechanism to identify all replies to a post. >> >> Note that the “blog post” use case is just an example. In fact, it could be anything collection-related (the relation from a book to its reviews, from a social graph to its members, …). >> >> The general question is: >> RDF is great to express individual relations between resources A and B1, B2, B3… >> but how can it express the relation between A and the set of all resources Bx? >> >> Best, >> >> Ruben >> >>> On 1 Mar 2012, at 07:28, Ruben Verborgh wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Semantic Web enthousiasts, >>>> >>>> Suppose we have a Web application for blogging: >>>> - /posts/35 is a blog post >>>> - /posts/35/comments are the comments to that post >>>> - /posts/35/comments/3 is a specific comment to this post >>>> >>>> In RDF, it is straightforward to make the relation between the blog post and a specific comment: >>>> </posts/35> :hasComment </posts/35/comments/3>. >>>> It is also easy to describe the relation between a specific comment and all comments: >>>> </posts/35/comments/4> :memberOf </posts/35/comments>. >>>> >>>> However, how do we indicate the relationship between the blog post and *all* comments that belong to it? >>>> I.e., what is the relationship between </posts/35> and </posts/35/comments> ? >>>> >>>> One could make a new predicate for that of course: >>>> </posts/35/> :hasComments </posts/35/comments>. >>>> But then, we still have to explain the relation between :hasComments and :hasComment; and we’d have to do that for every such plural predicate. >>>> >>>> This seems to be a fundamental problem. >>>> Clearly, the resource “comments on blog post 35” exists, but there doesn’t seem to be a straightforward way to describe it in RDF. >>>> RDF lists will not be sufficient: they could indeed explain the relation between a specific comment and all comments, but not the relation between all comments and the blog post. >>>> Also note that the indirect relation “_:x :hasComment _:y. _:y :memberOf _:z” is not sufficient: a blog post can have no comments, but even then it still has an (empty) comments resource. >>>> >>>> Have you encountered this issue and how do you solve it? >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> -- >>>> Ruben Verborgh >>>> http://twitter.com/RubenVerborgh >>>> PhD Student at Multimedia Lab – IBBT / ELIS, Ghent University, Belgium >>>> >>>> Make your hypermedia API ready for intelligent agents via http://restdesc.org/. >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>
Received on Thursday, 1 March 2012 08:36:57 UTC