W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2003

RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:35:48 +0200
To: "B. Shadgar" <shadgar@cs.bris.ac.uk>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "w3c-dist-auth" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCGEOGHBAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of B. Shadgar
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 7:02 PM
> To: Julian Reschke
> Cc: w3c-dist-auth
> Subject: Re: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections
>
>
>
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > some more thoughts:
> >
> > Properties are attached to resources. Ordering is a property of the
> > collection that contains internal member names identifying
> resources. For
> > instance, you might have several collections containing
> bindings to the same
> > set of resources, but with different orderings. There's no way
> to simulate
> > this with DASL (which -- by the way -- is not nearly done...)
> and returning
> > ordered results.
> >
> > Julian
> >
>
> Ok, what if we define a live property called resource-name which is
> representing the name of a resource?

We can't, because the name isn't a property of the resource. It's a property
of the binding *to* the resource (of which there can be many), and which
belongs to the state of the parent collection.

BTW: how would that help?

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2003 13:35:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:04 GMT