OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xdi message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Splitting $is into $is and $ref

Although it's been a very busy week, in my background "cook time" I've been thinking about the suggestion on last Friday's TC call that we split the current proposal for $is predicate behavior (https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/EquivalenceLinks) into two verbs.

The strawman I began playing with this weekend was to break it into:
  1. $is = logical equivalence = symmetric, transitive, reflexive
  2. $ref = canonical directional equivalence = asymmetric, intransitive, irreflexive
In thinking it through, I realized that this works very cleanly in three ways:
  1. Every standalone use of $is as a predicate that we currently have (at least in the XDI graph model document) would become $ref
  2. Everyplace where $is is used as the PREFIX for another predicate (e.g., $is$do) would NOT change, i.e., IMHO $is would still work well for this inversion function.
  3. This means that the awkward $is$is predicate (needed to identify the equivalence links for root nodes, for example) would now become $is$ref, which reads much better and is certainly more intuitive.
So, at this point I'm very much liking this idea, and I'm ready to write it up as a formal change to the https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/EquivalenceLinks proposal, but first I wanted to post it here on the mailing list for discussion. (I'm also copying this to https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/EquivalenceLinks/Discussion).


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]