RE: issue-13 amended proposal

Sure, here's a simple example, based on the NetWorth example from the
spec, that should illustrate the difference.

RDF within the LDPC <http://example.org/netWorth/> is as follows. For this
example I've included additional Provenance metadata within the container;
this is representative of the kind of 'metadata' one may have about a
resource that may not be regarded as belonging to the resource 'data' -
the data/metadadata split is an application choice, and nothing to do with
LDP:

@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
@prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>.
@prefix o: <http://example.org/ontology/>.
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .

<> a ldp:Container;
   dcterms:title "The assets of JohnZSmith";
   ldp:membershipSubject <http://example.org/netWorth/nw1>;
   ldp:membershipPredicate o:asset.

<http://example.org/netWorth/nw1>
   a o:NetWorth;
   o:asset <a1> .

<a1> a prov:Entity; prov:wasAttributedTo
<http://www.stevebattle.me/foaf.ttl#me> .

RDF within the LDPR <http://example.org/netWorth/a1>:

<> a o:Stock, ldp:Resource;
   o:value 100.00.

So in this example, I want to be able to distinguish between the RDF
represented by <http://example.org/netWorth/a1> and statements made about
this resource within <http://example.org/netWorth/>.

If I do a GET on the container, I may receive an RDF representation
containing triples inlined from <http://example.org/netWorth/a1>:

<> a ldp:Container;
   dcterms:title "The assets of JohnZSmith";
   ldp:membershipSubject <http://example.org/netWorth/nw1>;
   ldp:membershipPredicate o:asset.

<http://example.org/netWorth/nw1>
   a o:NetWorth;
   o:asset <a1> .

<a1> a prov:Entity, o:Stock, ldp:Resource;
   prov:wasAttributedTo <http://www.stevebattle.me/foaf.ttl#me>;
   o:value 100.00.

Now, even though <a1> has been inlined in the representation above, I
should still be able to use PATCH on the container to update statements
(in the container) _about_ it. I should NOT be able to use a PATCH on the
_container_ to update statements _within_
<http://example.org/netWorth/a1>, for this I could PATCH the LDPR
directly.  So, for example, I should be able to PATCH the container to
update the prov attribution of <a1>, even though <a1> was an 'inlined
member'.

Steve.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cyganiak [mailto:richard@cyganiak.de]
> Sent: 19 March 2013 21:59
> To: Steve Battle
> Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: issue-13 amended proposal
>
> On 19 Mar 2013, at 17:32, Steve Battle <steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk>
wrote:
> > As it was me who vetoed closing issue-13 at the F2F, I think the onus
is on
> me to come up with a revised proposal.
> >
> > The last (vetoed) proposal was as follows:
> > "Close the remainder of ISSUE-13 by saying that servers may refuse to
> update inlined members through PUT/PATCH to a container."
> >
> > My objection is that by referring to 'inlined members' this may be
> misinterpreted as applying to triplesfrom the container with subject, s,
> where the LDPR  identified by s is inlined in the response to GET. In
other
> words, It doesn't make a clear enough distinction between updating s,
and
> updating statements about s.
>
> To be honest, I don't understand the distinction you are making here
> between "s" and "statements about s". Can you give an example?
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
>
>
> > The possibility of such triples are, I think, required by section
5.2.1 "A
> Linked Data Platform Container MUST also be a conformant Linked Data
> Platform Resource." Rightly so - I would like to have user-managed
metadata
> in my containers. I should be allowed to use PUT/PATCH to update
> statements about inlined members, within the container.
> >
> > A simple amendment to the above proposal clarifies this by clarifying
that
> we really are talking only  about the content of these inlined LDPRs,
rather
> than any statement about them.
> >  "Close the remainder of ISSUE-13 by saying that servers may refuse to
> update the content of an inlined LDPR through PUT/PATCH to a container."
> >
> > Steve.
> >
> > --
> > Steve Battle
> > Semantic Engineer
> >
> > Mobile: +44 (0)7503 624 613
> > E-mail: steve.battle@sysemia.co.uk
> > Web: www.sysemia.com
> >
> > Sysemia Limited
> > The Innovation Centre, Bristol &  Bath Science Park, Dirac Crescent,
> > Emerson's Green, Bristol BS16 7FR Registered in England and Wales.
> > Company Number: 7555456
> >
> > DISCLAIMER
> > Information contained in this e-mail is intended for the use of the
> addressee only, and is confidential and may also be privileged. If you
receive
> this message in error, please advise us immediately. If you are not the
> intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution,
copying or
> use of this communication or the information in it is strictly
prohibited and
> may be unlawful. Attachments to this e-mail may contain software viruses
> which may damage your systems. Sysemia Ltd have taken reasonable steps
> to minimise this risk, but we advise that any attachments are virus
checked
> before they are opened.
> >
> >

Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 12:45:31 UTC