Re: Proposal for containers

hello henry.

On 2013-01-31 9:51 , "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
>Atom specifies a strict set of what is necessary. That is in atom every
>resource MUST have a title, a summary or a content, an author... That is
>just
>forced by the structure of the XML on them. This is sometimes awkward,
>such
>as when one posts an image, and the server has to create an atom entry
>but the server has to invent the title and the summary.

these requirements have nothing to do with XML. they have been added to
the model so that clients can depend on these properties being there. it
would have been trivial to make these things optional and define the XML
schema accordingly. but then you wouldn't have been be able to build
generic clients always displaying titles and authors.

nothing keeps any protocol (atompub or LDP) from making all protocol
metadata optional, but it usually helps to make a protocol more useful
when you have a certain minimal amount of information clients can depend
on. in the end, we'll end up with a matrix of LDP metadata properties and
will decide for all of them whether they're mandatory, optional, or
repeatable, something very similar to
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287#section-4.1.2 (which is stating the
requirements for entry metadata and a little bit different from
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287#section-4.1.1, which details the
requirement for collection metadata). we can make any choices we want in
that matrix, but having it is a required part of the LDP protocol, so that
it's clearly defined what to expect in conversations about entries and
collections.

cheers,

dret.

Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 11:43:28 UTC