Hi. Le dimanche 23 mai 2010 à 11:24 -0400, Steve K Speicher a écrit : > > > > I was wondering why not define a single relationship property: > relatedObject > > of (tuple) type: (Resource, Type of Resource) > > That way we can relate to any object as long as it is defined as a > > type of resource by the service provider. Similarly for the > > relationships other than "related". > > > > We could even define the relationship into the relationship > property: > > relatedObject of (triple) type: (Resource, Type of Resource, Type of > > Relationship) > > We had discussed these alternatives within the workgroup when defining > these properties. Mainly around the "oslc:manages" property, where it > was discussed that is could be extended to other resource types: > change sets, assets, requirements, etc. Though since we are building > on an extensible data model, we felt we didn't need to build > extensibility into the relationship properties. It had more value to > define more semantics of the property by adding resource type > information for a number of scenarios like query and reporting. > > One this we could consider, perhaps at a more general OSLC Common > Properties, is the usage of Dublin Core's dc:related property. Though > by the nature of building off an RDF data model, we can already infer > when resources are "related". We haven't seen a strong scenario need > for this general purpose dc:related property. >
In a Semantic Web approach, it's much better I think that relations convey their domain-related semantics, if possible, right from the start (provided there's concensus on what these mean), even though, in implementation terms, these could all be inheriting from a more generic kind of relation type. Implementation wise, it's probably better to know if one particular application needs to load other documents to get a larger view of a problem, if the links are already descriptive enough, as it would be some waste of processing, to access some document just to know their type and finally decide to discard them ;) Just my 2 cents a bit late ;) Best regards, -- Olivier BERGER <[email protected]> http://www-public.it-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 2048R/5819D7E8 Ingénieur Recherche - Dept INF Institut TELECOM, SudParis (http://www.it-sudparis.eu/), Evry (France)
