-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
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
Conversation
Allright, but without knowing that implementation experience, it is a bit hard to provide a review... |
There was a problem hiding this 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
@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 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. |
Maybe this could be rebased? |
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. |
?? |
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
|
0bc228e
to
93f39c6
Compare
Based on implementation experience..
Resolves #4