On Monday, March 31, 2014 5:29 PM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
> </people/markus> foaf:knows [ hydra:memberOf
> </people/markus/friends> ].
>
> means "Markus knows somebody who is a member of collection X".
>
> Check that collection X to find out if Markus knows more of them.
That second sentence is where this approach loses its appeal for me. IMO, it
doesn't really suggest to go and check "collection X to find out if Markus
knows more of them". Of course, you can always do, but why should you. A
person, and that's all we know about that blank node, might be a member of
multiple collections. Why should I go and inspect exactly this one to find
Markus' friends?
> 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.
I would be interested to hear your opinion on the thought I posted
yesterday:
{
"@id": "/markus",
"hasRelationshipIndirection": {
"property": "schema:knows",
"resource": "/markus/friends"
}
}
It could also be tweaked into something like
{
"@id": "/markus",
"hasRelationshipIndirector": {
"schema:knows": "/markus/friends"
}
}
so that it works nicely with property paths.
--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
