W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > December 2012

Re: LDP Agenda for December 17, 2012, with a list of issues to be closed

From: Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:43:34 -0800
Message-ID: <50D1C486.3020308@oracle.com>
To: "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
CC: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
See inline
All the best, Ashok

On 12/18/2012 10:10 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote:
> hello ashok.
>
> On 2012-12-16 14:42 , "Ashok Malhotra"<ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>  wrote:
>> On 12/15/2012 5:37 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote:
>>> how are members managed, how can they even be found, when the container
>>> is gone? are we actually doing member management and containers are
>>> optional? i'm a bit confused by the concept of container-less members.
>>> cheers, dret.
>> Members are identified by URIs.
> yes, but how would you find those? REST wants us to build hypermedia APIs,
> so if there is no navigable path to a URI (because a member is not a
> member of any collection anymore), then these members effectively become
> zombies, right?
>
>> I have two usecases in mind.  First, I have existing resources that I
>> want to
>> import into a LDP system.    For example, I have existing photographs or
>> music tracks
>> that I want to annotate and then put into a LDP container.
> do you want to import them (a la media collection)? in this case, they get
> a new URI and that will be managed in sync with the corresponding media
> link entry. or do you want to just link to them from your metadata entry?
> in that case, their URI is outside of the management domain of the LDP
> server, and the LDP server just manages the metadata entries, but not the
> blobs.
I think the word "import" is misleading here.  I just want to add resources in another store
to a collection.  All we need is a link that points to the resource in the other store.  When the
container is deleted the link is deleted as well.  The resource is managed by the other store.
>
>> Second, and this is still controversial, if I want a LDPR to be able to
>> belong to
>> more than one container.
> i can see that happening, but this is more secondary after we have figured
> out how we approach the three different kinds of setups i described in my
> last email about member management.
>
> thanks and cheers,
>
> dret.
>
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2012 13:44:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 9 May 2013 13:44:27 UTC