David, I have a different perspective. Using your draw analogy. IMO we are creating a document that lists the items in the draw using element constructs.
Dick Brooks > On Jul 27, 2022, at 10:43 PM, David Kemp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Gary, > > That sounds strange, but I have no experience with RDF serializers. Consider > a physical junk drawer resource, it contains a paper clip, a button, an a pad > of sticky notes. There is no way to make an RDF statement that describes a > list of [paper clip, button, and sticky notes] (3 nodes) without also being > forced to create a fourth node for the drawer? > > RDF makes a distinction between containers and collections. Based on one > example (#20), the latter appears that it might be an anonymous list of > items, i.e. items a and b have IRIs, but the collection of a and b doesn't > have an IRI. Then again, I might be totally confused. If a collection is > not required to be a node, then that is what I'm proposing for SpdxDocument. > And if collection is not a node, the Collection class should not have an open > arrow to (be a subclass of) Element, whereas if it were called Container it > would. > > Regards, > David > > >> On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 8:30 PM Gary O'Neall <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> >> >> Agree with v3 having a more expressive graph – a definite improvement. I do >> recall in early days of SPDX development having an issue where RDF >> serializers would drop nodes if they were not referenced which helped lead >> us to having an SPDX Document as a root level node in the graph. We >> included this node in the logical as well as the serialization model for >> RDF. I have a feeling we may (re)discover the same issue in v3 RDF >> serialization where we will need a root collection to reference all the >> elements we intend to serialize. We could decide to make this root element >> something not included in the logical model or we could require custom RDF >> serialization libraries as alternatives. My current thinking is we have an >> SPDXDocument in the model for the serializations to “contain” all the >> elements we wish to serialize (in RDF, it just needs to be referenced). To >> make this more flexible, we could expand the types of elements which the >> SPDXDocument could “contain” (e.g. Relationships). >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Gary -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#4717): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4717 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/92634687/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
