Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix/ws storage comment #50

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 22, 2021
Merged

Fix/ws storage comment #50

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 22, 2021

Conversation

csarven
Copy link
Member

@csarven csarven commented May 25, 2021

Based on implementation experience..

Resolves #4

@csarven csarven requested a review from timbl May 25, 2021 11:58
@kjetilk
Copy link
Member

kjetilk commented May 25, 2021

Allright, but without knowing that implementation experience, it is a bit hard to provide a review...

Copy link
Contributor

@timbl timbl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Expected this PR to be a small change

@csarven
Copy link
Member Author

csarven commented May 25, 2021

@timbl I've branched this off PR 49's branch.. and so it appears to show the switch from ttl to n3. The actual update to the comment is in this commit 9526a82 (linked above).

@kjetilk It occurred to me that while the ontology didn't specify a rdfs:domain for ws:storage, and so, as far as the machines are concerned, no issue. However, the human-readable rdfs:comment was stuck on the initial use of the property and didn't get updated to reflect how we've been using it. The most common usage is actually agent having a storage eg: <https://csarven.ca/#i> <http://www.w3.org/ns/pim/space#storage> <https://csarven.ca/> .

The update doesn't interfere with the domain and reflects what's in the wild. Alternatively, we bash in a domain and break existing publishing practice and applications. Not a good path.

@TallTed
Copy link
Contributor

TallTed commented May 25, 2021

Maybe this could be rebased?

@kidehen
Copy link

kidehen commented Jun 2, 2021

The :storage property definition need an rdfs:domain relation for additional usage clarity.

The :comment relations associated with Workspace related classes look fine, from my vantage point.

Here's one my profile docs demonstrating how I use pim:storage. Basically, the rdfs:domain is a foaf:Agent and rdfs:range is a foaf:Document.

@scenaristeur
Copy link

scenaristeur commented Jun 9, 2021

@kidehen

rdfs:range is a foaf:Document

??
I thought the range of a ws:storage was something like ldp:Container . Am I wrong ?

space.n3 Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@gibsonf1
Copy link

gibsonf1 commented Jun 9, 2021

For TrinPod, we created a new subclass of foaf:Agent called solid-user and use that for the domain of space:storage:

for ldp:inbox, we use the ldp-user as the domain

@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix neo: <https://neo.graphmetrix.net/node/> .
@prefix pext: <http://www.ontotext.com/proton/protonext#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
 pext:User 
    neo:m_cid \"s_user\"^^xsd:string ;
    a skos:Concept ;
    rdfs:label \"User\"^^xsd:string ;
    neo:t_genus foaf:Agent .
 neo:s_ldp-user 
    neo:m_cid \"s_ldp-user\"^^xsd:string ;
    neo:t_genus pext:User ;
    a skos:Concept .
 neo:s_solid-user 
    neo:m_cid \"s_solid-user\"^^xsd:string ;
    neo:t_genus neo:s_ldp-user ;
    a skos:Concept .

@csarven csarven merged commit 1cdd91b into main Jun 22, 2021
@csarven csarven deleted the fix/ws-storage-comment branch June 22, 2021 11:10
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Expected rdfs:domain for the pimspace storage property
8 participants