- From: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 23:14:34 -0500
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- CC: public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>, Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>
On 11/22/2012 01:19 PM, Nathan wrote: > Alexandre, All, > > I've seen you mention LDP interoperability many times, I agree it's very > important. > > A) Every LDPR is compatible WebID 1.0. > B) Every WebID 1.0 Resource is compatible with LDP. > > You want (A), but you are asserting (B) in order to argue for a > #fragment constraint. Not exactly. 1. The LDPR would concern only the WebID Profile. With hash URIs for WebIDs, the distinction (aka. avoiding http-range-14 for WebID) would be made by design. 2. The relationship with LDP is basically: don't paint yourself in the corner by making a choice that would introduce some incompatibility with LDP. That's because 303s and HTTP POST/PUT/DELETE don't play nice together. Alexandre. > > WebID interoperability entails that we ensure (A) is true. > > (B) is an LDP interoperability issue, and should be addressed in the LDP > WG. > > Best, > > Nathan >
Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 04:14:29 UTC