From:
higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nataraj Nagaratnam
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 9:09
AM
To: Higgins (Trust Framework)
Project developer discussions
Cc: 'Higgins (Trust Framework)
Project developer discussions'; higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [higgins-dev] Telecon
to discuss alternatives to Node
In this example, house/building could be an entity -
that is quite possible - and in that example, the address can be its attribute.
But address by itself .. its hard to imagine how that could be an entity. If we
keep house as an entity.. then the relationship between a person-entity and
house-entity could be has-a, owns, rents relationship.
-raj
"Drummond
Reed" ---03/02/2008 12:03:39 PM---I know it seems strange that Postal
Address could be a node (or DigitalEntity), as it is usually expressed as an
attribute. But
|
"Drummond
Reed" <drummond.reed@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by:
higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
03/02/2008 12:02 PM
|
Please respond to
"Higgins \(Trust Framework\) Project developer discussions"
<higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
|
To
|
"'Higgins
(Trust Framework) Project developer discussions'"
<higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [higgins-dev]
Telecon to discuss alternatives to Node
|
|
I know it seems strange that Postal Address could be a node (or
DigitalEntity), as it is usually expressed as an attribute. But we discovered
the same thing with the XDI RDF model – you can model it both ways. And in the
case of a postal address, it is hard to deny the option of the Postal Address
being a node/DigitalEntity because a the addressable building (house, office,
church, etc.) is certainly an standalone entity that can have its own digital
representation.
So one
way to model it is person as a node/DigitalEntity and house as a
node/DigitalEntity and the person has a relation (“has-a”, “owns”, “rents”) to
the house.
=Drummond
From: higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 7:53 AM
To: Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions
Cc: 'Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions';
higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [higgins-dev] Telecon to discuss alternatives to Node
So seems
like a situation where we will continue to vote/discuss until we get the right
answer. We left the F2F meeting one night with the understanding that we
decided upon entity and the next morning it was node, and that did not seem to
be a consensus.
We should not be tied to RDF (as that may change like other things have), we
should name things because they make sense.
In diagram there is advantage to describing these as nodes, as Person Entity
and then we would have Postal Address Attribute, as Postal Address is not a
node.
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
"Paul
Trevithick" ---03/01/2008 11:46:24 PM---Although Entity was the winner of
the vote, it was decided at the Higgins call last Thursday that we needed a
dedicated call to
|
From:
|
"Paul Trevithick" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
To:
|
"'Higgins \(Trust Framework\) Project developer discussions'"
<higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
Date:
|
03/01/2008 11:46 PM
|
|
Subject:
|
[higgins-dev] Telecon to discuss alternatives to Node
|
Although Entity was the winner of the vote, it was decided at the Higgins call
last Thursday that we needed a dedicated call to make sure that we’re all on
the same page as to exactly what we’re naming here. We felt that we needed at
least one of the folks proposing the winning “Entity” term to be present on the
call before we can finalize this issue. The non-Entity folks were not convinced
that we’re all seeing the problem (never mind the solution) the same way.
To try to get to closure, I’ve created: http://doodle.ch/7sfxpr6hvu29wnys
to pick a good time on Wednesday to discuss this.
One more thing...
Nodes don’t just represent people and their interconnections in the social
graph. Nodes (along with Attributes) are the building blocks for representing everything: People, Groups, Events,
Documents, Postal Addresses in a Context.
Speaking of which, here’s an example of a Node representing some partial aspect
of a Person Entity that has an attribute “hasAddress” whose value is a Node
representing a postal address. When the value of an attribute is a Node, we
call this a “complex” (as opposed to a literal) value. Literal values are drawn
as squares.
[If you’re familiar with RDF you’ll see that a Higgins Node is almost exactly
the same concept as an RDF node.]
If, after the discussion, we all think we really are seeing the issues the same
way, then we’ll settle on Entity as the Node replacement, as it was the most
popular term.
-Paul
I did think of one other word too: “item”.
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
