xdi message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Splitting $is into $is and $ref
- From: Drummond Reed <drummond.reed@xdi.org>
- To: OASIS - XDI TC <xdi@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:50:31 -0800
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:
- $is = logical equivalence = symmetric, transitive, reflexive
- $ref = canonical directional equivalence = asymmetric, intransitive, irreflexive
In thinking it through, I realized that this works very cleanly in three ways:
- Every standalone use of $is as a predicate that we currently have (at least in the XDI graph model document) would become $ref
- 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.
- 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.
=Drummond
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]