W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > November 2011

RE: HTTP POST and @subject IRI

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 10:20:31 +0800
To: <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005b01cc9cf3$d98f87b0$8cae9710$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
> The service is responsible for how it interprets its input; it could 
> very well be expecting to receive a blank node and then provide it with 
> a global identifier. In fact, this is likely how a service that assigns 
> global names (IRIs) to blank nodes would work.

I agree that the service is responsible for how it interprets its inputs,
but how do you distinguish between a blank node that should remain a blank
node and a blank node that should be converted to an IRI?


> If the service is unable to alter the input before it is stored for 
> later retrieval, then I can see using the other solution (@subject: ""), 
> but this actually seems a lot messier to me. I would prefer to retrieve 
> an object with a fully-populated @subject, and not have to rely on 
> storing information about where I retrieved it in some separate state 
> container.

Gregg's suggestion doesn't necessarily implies that the JSON-LD document
stays exactly the same, it just implies that the information contained in it
stays the same. By using a relative IRI in a POST you are able to express
that it's up to the server to create an absolute IRI. Of course the server
is free to rewrite the JSON-LD document to contain the absolute IRI when
retrieved later.


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 7 November 2011 02:21:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:35 GMT