W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: Summary of (substantive) change requests from post-LC comments

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:57:57 +0100
Message-ID: <4E844F35.7080804@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org


On 27/09/11 18:12, Gregory Williams wrote:
> On Sep 27, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Chime Ogbuji wrote:
>
>> == SJ-1 ==
>>
>> There was a request to add a requirement that ALL methods return
>> the ETag or Last-Modified value of the current state of the
>> resource. I think this is a bit much to request of all applications
>> and the paragraph before 5.1 Status Codes already encourages the
>> use of cache control headers with appropriate references
>
> While I agree with the spirit of the suggestion, I would object to
> making this a requirement. I think the specifics of how to do this
> naturally falls out of from the relevant specs, but forcing
> implementations to do etag/last-modified headers seems like a big
> burden.

+1 : not a requirement.

In fact, I see this as orthogonal to the SPARQL Graph Store Protocol. 
It's proper use of HTTP and not specific to SPARQL.

Like IM-1 and the concurrency point response:

[[
Concurrency management is beyond the scope of this protocol and 
implementations should be able to do what they see fit to support 
concurrent access etc.
]]

FWIW I'm planning on adding ETags to Fuseki.

	Andy
>
> .greg
>
>
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2011 10:58:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:46 GMT