W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > August 2012

Re: MyProfile REST API.

From: Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 13:14:50 +0200
Message-ID: <5027902A.8090700@wp.pl>
To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
CC: Andrei Sambra <andrei@fcns.eu>, WebID <public-webid@w3.org>, public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>
On 12.08.2012 12:03, Henry Story wrote:
>
> On 12 Aug 2012, at 11:56, Dominik Tomaszuk<ddooss@wp.pl>  wrote:
>
>> On 12.08.2012 11:40, Andrei Sambra wrote:
>>> On 08/12/2012 11:34 AM, Dominik Tomaszuk wrote:
>>>> With message body? If yes, what type is the content?
>>>>
>>> The content type doesn't really matter for successful requests, since
>>> all you should care about is whether the request was successful or not.
>>>
>>> I suppose I can use EARL for the cases where you require a boolean
>>> answer, and the request is not successful (so you have the reason for
>>> your failure).
>> I suppose better than EARL is [1] and/or [2]. It will be nice if the content (including 200 and I guess 400) is an RDF graph.
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/content#
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/http#
>
> Those vocabularies seem way to precise: ways of describing http itself. You don't want to describe HTTP, you want to send a message back explaining ( in machine readable form ) what went wrong if asked for it in RDF.
I want rather to describe HTTP response, including status code in 
machine readable form.

> So I think EARL is a lot closer to being right.
>
> You may want to use those vocabs if say you wanted to write that you had trouble fetching remote graphs, and that is why you could not authenticate the user.... That is how they are meant to work with earl I think...
You're right in the middle. I want message body of success or failure. 
EARL is rather for testing not for results, but of course you can 
describe message body in EARL.

Dominik

>
> Henry
>
>>
>> Dominik
>>
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>>> On 11.08.2012 22:42, Andrei Sambra wrote:
>>>>> All successful requests return 200.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>>>> From: "Dominik Tomaszuk"<ddooss@wp.pl>
>>>>> To: "Andrei Sambra"<andrei@fcns.eu>
>>>>> Cc: "WebID"<public-webid@w3.org>, "public-rww"<public-rww@w3.org>
>>>>> Subject: MyProfile REST API.
>>>>> Date: Sat, Aug 11, 2012 22:15
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10.08.2012 23:15, Andrei Sambra wrote:
>>>>>> Another example for deleting the cached copy of a profile:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The request:
>>>>>> HTTP/1.1 DELETE
>>>>>> https://auth.my-profile.eu/profile/cache/?webid=<urlencoded WebID>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Returns*:
>>>>>> Successfully deleted profile
>>>>> https://my-profile.eu/people/deiu/card#me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *for now, the operation will be performed only if the request is
>>>>> made by
>>>>>> profile owner, or on his/her behalf (!)
>>>>> What HTTP status code is returned when it is successful? 200 or 204?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Dominik
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>
>
>
Received on Sunday, 12 August 2012 11:15:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 12 August 2012 11:15:17 GMT