[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [oslc-promcode] Re: resource value-type and container resource lifecycle
Members, During updating resource shape, I found that defineFor:Target → Artifact seems no use. This relation does not appear in fig.6 but fig.3. Originally, Target was an independent resource type (or LocalResource), but now inline. <http://example.com/promcode/item/42> a oslc_promcode:Artifact; oslc:target <http://example.com/promcode/item/42#target-3>. <http://example.com/promcode/item/42#target-3> a oslc_promcode:Target; oslc:definedFor <http://example.com/promcode/item/42>. Since they have same lifecycle, the definedFor range of <x#targe-y> always points to <x>. However, it seems not making something bad though. Any ideas? Regards, Kaz
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]