- From: Sergio Fernández <sergio.fernandez@salzburgresearch.at>
- Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 09:50:27 +0100
- To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
- CC: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Hi, On 02/02/13 00:09, Ashok Malhotra wrote: > Hi Arnaud: > Just to be clear, there are three proposals re. aggregation vs. > containment: > > 1. Two classes of resources: containers and aggregators. When a > container is deleted all its members > are deleted. When an aggregator its deleted its members are not deleted. > > 2. One class of resource with an attribute that can be set to allow > either container or aggregator > behavior > > 3. One class of resource which contains either members or links to > members. When a container is > deleted all its contents are deleted. You use links to get aggregator > behavior. > > You are arguing for 1. correct? I thought the WG was moving towards 3. Not sure if we all agree, but at least IMO it is the most convenient solution to ISSUE-34. Cheers, -- Sergio Fernández Salzburg Research +43 662 2288 318 Jakob-Haringer Strasse 5/II A-5020 Salzburg (Austria) http://www.salzburgresearch.at
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 08:51:22 UTC