Reverse tree relationship

scossu commented

2026-01-30 23:14:22 +00:00

Owner

In order to have a complete independence of curatorial resources from trees, the has_tree property should be reversed and a RDF relationship should be instead established from the tree to the resource. This triple should be kept in the tree graph for easier cleanup.

has_tree can still be used in a submission as it is now, as a boolean value to indicate that a tree should be generated for a resource. When re-generating the LL, this field can be set to true if a tree is found, or false otherwise.

In order to have a complete independence of curatorial resources from trees, the `has_tree` property should be reversed and a RDF relationship should be instead established *from* the tree *to* the resource. This triple should be kept in the tree graph for easier cleanup. `has_tree` can still be used in a submission as it is now, as a boolean value to indicate that a tree should be generated for a resource. When re-generating the LL, this field can be set to `true` if a tree is found, or `false` otherwise.

scossu added this to the v1.0.0 RC milestone

2026-01-30 23:14:22 +00:00

scossu added the

area/rdf

area/content_model

labels

2026-01-30 23:14:22 +00:00

scossu commented

2026-03-25 02:27:11 +00:00

Author

Owner

Not critical for release. Deferring to 1.0.0 for now.

This is still desirable, and if production systems start adopting the current trees, a migration tool would be necessary, so it's best to resolve it sooner than later.

Not critical for release. Deferring to 1.0.0 for now. This is still desirable, and if production systems start adopting the current trees, a migration tool would be necessary, so it's best to resolve it sooner than later.

scossu modified the milestone from v1.0.0 RC to v1.0.0

2026-03-25 02:27:19 +00:00

scossu added the

labels

2026-04-01 19:03:24 +00:00

scossu commented

2026-04-01 21:03:43 +00:00

Author

Owner

After some further thought, there is not a strong enough case to stir up one of the most complex parts of the submission process. The relationships are fine as they are and they are currently doing what they are supposed to do.

The fact that trees are entirely rebuilt if the structure changes, does not make them less preservation-worthy. So, there is no reason to make the resources in the main graph "independent" from their trees.

Closing.

After some further thought, there is not a strong enough case to stir up one of the most complex parts of the submission process. The relationships are fine as they are and they are currently doing what they are supposed to do. The fact that trees are entirely rebuilt if the structure changes, does not make them less preservation-worthy. So, there is no reason to make the resources in the main graph "independent" from their trees. Closing.

scossu

2026-04-01 21:03:44 +00:00

closed this issue
added the
s
wontfix
label

Rows
Columns

Reverse tree relationship #33