On 03/31/2014 08:29 AM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
Hi Peter,
This is why I started by saying the focus of the discussion should be on what
we want to achieve.
With my proposed solution, it is achieved.
Furthermore, this solution allows you to add any metadata you might like;
a Hydra client just wouldn't need it (even though others might).
Right now, don't need anything else than just finding the members of a
collection.
But this is violating both the spirit and the letter of RDF. It would be
better to introduce entirely new syntactic mechanisms
A new syntax would break everything that exists. How is that better?
The proposed approach doesn't break anything and achieves what we need,
without violating the RDF model.
Huh? If you want to be in the RDF camp, you have to play by RDF rules.
And we do that.
</people/markus> foaf:knows [ hydra:memberOf </people/markus/friends> ].
means “Markus knows somebody who is a member of collection X".
But that's not what this says. It says that Markus knows some entity that is
related by an unknown relationship to some unknown other entity.
Check that collection X to find out if Markus knows more of them.
I'm not saying there will be more in there… just saying that you could check it.
Handy for a hypermedia client. Works in practice, doesn't break the model.
If you want more semantics, just add them:
</people/markus/friends> :isACollectionOf [
:hasPredicate foaf:knows;
:hasSubject </people/Markus
]
But that is _not_ needed to achieve my 1 and 2.
Well this certainly adds more triples. Whether it adds more meaning is a
separate issue.
Best,
Ruben
It appears that you feel that adding significant new expressive power is
somehow less of a change than adding new syntax. I do not feel this way at all.
peter
