W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > February 2013

Re: ISSUE-37: short description of model

From: Roger Menday <Roger.Menday@uk.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:09:08 +0000
CC: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Working Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F9072E98-936A-44BD-962A-E414D040FCED@uk.fujitsu.com>
To: "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>

hi Erik, 

>> The LDP protocol provides the mechanism to observe and evolve state via
>> interaction with the constituent Linked Data resources through their
>> outgoing arcs.
> 
> i think i am getting closer to understanding this, i was parsing it wrong.
> but if the "through their outgoing arcs" refers to the "evolve state via
> interaction" part, 
> then i am wondering what's wrong with just saying
> "links"?

I am kind of wary of using 'links' because it might be interpreted purely as 'actionable links'. I am referring to "what" happens - which is that the shape of the graph is changed - where the shape is defined by the resources and their properties/attributes/links/arcs/etc... The "how" is then the hypermedia controls (including links, forms), etc. 

> it's what people from the REST and hypermedia communities would
> expect and understand, and for any actionable link that you use as
> hypermedia control,

In the above I would add, "actionable link *or form*" 
Or this that implied ... i.e. a form directs some action via a link (??) 

> it only makes sense if there is an identifier at the
> target side. if there's no identifier, it's not a link, right? or said
> differently, you cannot meaningfully link to the integer "42".

http://km.aifb.kit.edu/projects/numbers/web/n42

But, I know what you mean, and it is potentially mis-leading in conjunction with the word 'link'  
But you can "arc" to it :)

regards, 
Roger


Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 22:09:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 9 May 2013 13:44:29 UTC