DFC standard specifications
DFC Use Cases
DFC Use Cases
  • Introduction
  • Sources and licences
  • Contact and partners
  • Semantic specifications
    • Business ontology
    • Product ontology
    • Technical ontology
  • Technical specifications
    • Protocols specifications
    • Decentralized identifier matching reference system
    • Specifics API
    • Authentication strategy
    • Architecture representations
  • Prototype specifications
  • 🚧Solid client protocol
  • 🚧Connector
    • Model specifications
    • Semantizer specifications
    • Connector specifications
  • Use Cases
    • Enterprise Use Cases
    • Product Use Cases
      • Product Transformations
      • CSA Use Cases
    • Orders
    • Order Use Cases
      • Wholesale Order Processing
    • Glossary of terms
  • Appendixes
    • Appendix 1. General decisions
      • Federation vs Syndication
      • Stateless or stateful?
      • Service granularity
      • Directionality
      • Identification and authentication
      • Centralized or decentralized data storage
      • Metadata repository
    • Appendix 2. Technical decisions
      • Libraries to develop in semantic
      • Transition strategy fron current to ideal
      • Service standard
      • Serialization
      • Transport layer
      • Multi- or single-resource requests?
      • Right delegation between platforms and DFC
      • Data validity and inferences
    • Appendix 3. Practical Examples
      • Version 1.9
      • Version 1.8.2
      • version 1.7.4
      • version 1.7.3
      • version 1.7.1
      • version 1.7
      • version 1.6.2
      • version 1.6.1
      • version 1.6
      • version 1.5.1
      • version 1.5
      • version 1.3
      • version 1.2
  • Contributing
    • Procedures
      • Updates to the ontology
        • Patch releases procedure
        • Minor releases procedure
        • Major releases procedure
      • Taxonomy enrichment
        • Taxonomy updates
    • Platform Notifcations
  • Platform Register
    • Platform Register
Powered by GitBook
On this page

Was this helpful?

  1. Appendixes
  2. Appendix 2. Technical decisions

Data validity and inferences

What we do when data is not completed = with the correct backlinks or inverse links (e.g. CatalogItem:references / DefinedProduct:referencedBy).

Is it the responsibility of the sender to link data (inferences) or the receiver?

It isn't reasonable to expect all receiving applications to implement an Ontology Reasoner/Inferrer, so we need the sender to provide all the links (including inverse links).

This gives us the most robust implementation of the standard: allowing an application to start from any point and traverse the ontology data in different directions, which supports the widest range of the use cases.

Decision

  • When transmitting data via the DFC standard any and all inverse relations (that exist in the ontology) MUST be provided for each transferred property.

PreviousRight delegation between platforms and DFCNextAppendix 3. Practical Examples

Last updated 10 months ago

Was this helpful?