Difference between revisions of "Talk:ESciDoc Content Relations"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: * From '''Definition''': "a content relation a->b also assumes a content relation b->a" and "directions a->b and b->a may have different labels (e.g. isRevisionOf, hasRevisions) that are e...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=== Bi-directional / inverse Relations === | |||
* From '''Definition''': "a content relation a->b also assumes a content relation b->a" and "directions a->b and b->a may have different labels (e.g. isRevisionOf, hasRevisions) that are expressed with a specific relation ontology" | * From '''Definition''': "a content relation a->b also assumes a content relation b->a" and "directions a->b and b->a may have different labels (e.g. isRevisionOf, hasRevisions) that are expressed with a specific relation ontology" | ||
** Does that mean, we have to store two relations for every added relation and that we have to check provided ontologies for completeness in the sense that every predicate must have a counterpart? [[User:Frank|Frank]] 17:52, 5 December 2007 (CET) | ** Does that mean, we have to store two relations for every added relation and that we have to check provided ontologies for completeness in the sense that every predicate must have a counterpart? [[User:Frank|Frank]] 17:52, 5 December 2007 (CET) | ||
** I would assume that only one relation is created (either isRevisionOf or hasRevisions). Anyway, the addition of an entry in the RELS-EXT datastream may require access rights to the source object. Therefore, both "directions" might be required - even they are equal from functional point of view --[[User:Inga|Inga]] 22:06, 5 December 2007 (CET) | ** I would assume that only one relation is created (either isRevisionOf or hasRevisions). Anyway, the addition of an entry in the RELS-EXT datastream may require access rights to the source object. Therefore, both "directions" might be required - even they are equal from functional point of view --[[User:Inga|Inga]] 22:06, 5 December 2007 (CET) | ||
Revision as of 07:40, 6 December 2007
Bi-directional / inverse Relations[edit]
- From Definition: "a content relation a->b also assumes a content relation b->a" and "directions a->b and b->a may have different labels (e.g. isRevisionOf, hasRevisions) that are expressed with a specific relation ontology"
- Does that mean, we have to store two relations for every added relation and that we have to check provided ontologies for completeness in the sense that every predicate must have a counterpart? Frank 17:52, 5 December 2007 (CET)
- I would assume that only one relation is created (either isRevisionOf or hasRevisions). Anyway, the addition of an entry in the RELS-EXT datastream may require access rights to the source object. Therefore, both "directions" might be required - even they are equal from functional point of view --Inga 22:06, 5 December 2007 (CET)