ISSUE-34

1 RESOLVED

The rest of this page is being kept for historical purposes.

On the 2013-02-11 WG call the working group resolved to accept the Back to Basics proposal as the basis for discussion going forward. The Editor's Draft of the specification will be updated to reflect this over the next 1-2 weeks.

1.1 Issue

• LDPCs provide a way of managing groups of resources with composition semantics. But it is unclear how to do the same for groups of resources with simple aggregation semantics (copied from Issue 34 as a short cached in-line summary - issue contains several paragraphs of description).
• Issue 34 may have additional links to emails. Some discussions occurred before an issue was assigned, and some discussions failed to mention "issue-34" explicitly so they were not automatically linked to the issue by TrackBot.

1.2 Proposals

• Issue-34 - Aggregation: simple proposal spawned from email threads
• Issue-34 - Bug-tracker LDP service spawned from email threads
• Issue-34: Back to Basics originated on the wiki, likely to spawn email threads

1.3 Comparison of Proposals

Summary of the approaches provided in the wiki thus far:

• Issue-34 - Aggregation: simple proposal Aggregation disjoint from Container
  • Introduces new Class called Aggregation.
• Issue-34: Back to Basics Container specializes/restrictions Aggregation
  • Like the previous "simple proposal" and clarifies that you can POST create/add to Aggregation (just like Container). Proposes new class Aggregation as well, though says that Container is a refinement.
• Issue-34 - Bug-tracker LDP service Link collection
  • Introduces link collection and way to insert link to existing resources by creation of resources with only single membership triple.

1.3.1 Criteria

• Jan 7 WG call points
  • Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to ask if the only distinction between aggregation and composition is whether resources are deleted when their containers are deleted
  • Steve Speicher: Composition: 1) resource only "lives" in one container 2) when container is deleted, so its contents 3) may (or may not) be able to move resources between containers
  • Eric Prud'hommeaux: is it worth dividing this into facets (creates resources, accepts external resources, must|may|mustn't deleted all|created resources)