# Base: entry.2004-05-26.1135.n3
@prefix xsd:     <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix rdf:     <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix :        <http://bblfish.net/work/atom-owl/2004-06-22/ns#> .

<>    a       :Entry ;
      :author [ a       :Person ;
                :email  <mailto:hjs@bblfish.net> ;
                :name   "Henry Story"^^xsd:string ;
                :url    <http://bblfish.net/>
              ] ;
      :content
              [ a       :Content ;
                :data   "In my last model I thought it would be nice to simply remove the link class. It did really clarify the UML diagram a lot. And it nearly works. It works for <a href='http://bitworking.org/projects/atom/draft-gregorio-09.html'>the current spec</a>.  But there <a href='http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceLinkPurpose'>is talk</a> of adding other things to this link element, such as a descriptive text field for example. The text field is  a nasty one for my simplification, because there really is no way to get around that. It has to be attached to a link object. <p> So Link Class is back in. The problem is that it seems to be sooo  general. So many things could end up going through a Link Class that it would make UML diagrams completely meaningless. Luckily there is a standard way of dealing with this called an Association class (Fowler, 'UML Distilled, Second Edition', p.98). This allows me to annotate the properties on a Link without making the diagram unreadable. And the result is a readable UML diagram <img src='Atom-June-25-UML-inherited-simple-3.jpg'>"^^rdf:XMLLiteral ;
                :type   "text/html"
              ] ;
      :copyright "Creative Commons" ;
      :created "2004-06-26T11:35:00.000 GMT+02:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
      :id     <tag:bblfish.net/blog/entry.2004-05-26.1135.n3> ;
      :title  [ a       :Content ;
                :data   "The Link Class"^^rdf:XMLLiteral ;
                :type   "text/simple"
              ] .