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

Re: issue-34 example

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:40:23 +0000
Message-ID: <50F99717.4070208@epimorphics.com>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
POST, as it's simply additional triples:

<Person/1> :friend <Person/4> .

This follows from "Extending a database through an append operation." 
(RFC 2616)

(it would be valuable to be explicit that POST to LDP-R is add triples)

	Andy

On 18/01/13 00:25, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> Hi Roger,
>
> I have to admit not to understand how your example justifies adding
> anything to LDP.
>
> The spec as it stands allows you to update resources via PUT. Why isn't
> it enough to PUT the new representation with the added Person? Why does
> your resource have to be anything special to the server rather than just
> another RDF resource which happens to contain references to a bunch of
> resources in a totally standard RDF fashion?
> --
> Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
>
>
> Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com> wrote on 01/17/2013 02:31:18 PM:
>
>  > From: Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com>
>  > To: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>,
>  > Date: 01/17/2013 02:32 PM
>  > Subject: issue-34 example
>  >
>  >
>  > Given the following LD.
>  >
>  > <Person/1>
>  >    :friend <Person/7>, <Person/9>
>  >    :enemy <Person/6>
>  >
>  > Issue-34 says it needs a simple way of linking a new friend
>  > (<Person/4>), to end up with
>  >
>  > <Person/1>
>  >    :friend <Person/7>, <Person/9>, <Person/4>
>  >    :enemy <Person/6>
>  >
>  > ?
>  >
>  > So, I believe that aggregation is an essential piece for lDP.
>  >
>  > regards,
>  > Roger
Received on Friday, 18 January 2013 18:40:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:44 UTC