Re: Specs defining Collection and Paging (former: Pagination - let's finalize the collection design (ISSUE-42))

Order is something that we need for various use cases, so ActivityStreams'
OrderedCollection fits the bill here.  And hence the massively cc'ed
discussion about it.

Given that ore:Proxies are quite a lot of overhead, especially when
projected into JSON-LD, and one of the explicit aims is to make the JSON
serialization easy to use, rdf:List seems like the most appropriate way.

The document for pages and order that I'm going to integrate into the next
Protocol draft is:
  http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/protocol/paging.html

Rob


On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Jacob Jett <jjett2@illinois.edu> wrote:

> Question, if collections of annotations is the goal, why not reuse the
> Europeana Data Model's isGatheredInto predicate?
>
> Also, is order something that a collection has? That sounds more like a
> list...
>
> Regards,
>
> Jacob
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
> Jacob Jett
> Research Assistant
> Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship
> The Graduate School of Library and Information Science
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
> 501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA
> (217) 244-2164
> jjett2@illinois.edu
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:24 AM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> The Annotation WG will not use the Triple Pattern Fragments as there's
>> nothing normative to refer to.  We can refer to the OrderedCollections in
>> the Social Web WG, but not a similar construct in Hydra.  Otherwise we
>> could have simply referred to the outcome of the Open Annotation CG and
>> called it a day :)
>>
>> Some additional feedback, as per discussions regarding the
>> OrderedCollection, we consider that first and last are properties of the
>> Collection or List-Of-Views, not the individual page/view.
>>
>> Without the context, it is impossible to know whether the array for
>> "member" is an rdf:List or just a set of triples with the same predicate.
>> We have requirements for per item ordering, in every page, without needing
>> the client to re-order the items based on some property value. The
>> construction quoted below would either:
>>
>> 1.  Not fulfill those requirements, if member is a partial set when
>> retrieving each page
>> 2.  Be incorrect, if member is a different rdf:List instance when
>> retrieving each page
>>
>> So, as far as the Annotation group goes, we would not adopt that
>> construction as it stands, regardless of the formal status of the work.
>>
>> Hope that helps,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:00 AM, elf Pavlik <
>> perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/11/2015 10:52 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>>> > As announced, I would like to finalize the collection design as the
>>> next
>>> > step.  The representation of a specific view on the collection could
>>> look somewhat
>>> > like this:
>>> >   {
>>> >     "@id": "http://api.example.com/an-issue/comments",
>>> >     "@type": "Collection",
>>> >     "member": [ ... ],
>>> >     "view": {
>>> >       "@id": "/an-issue/comments?page=3",
>>> >       "@type": "PartialCollectionView",
>>> >       "first": "/an-issue/comments",
>>> >       "previous": "/an-issue/comments?page=2",
>>> >       "next": "/an-issue/comments?page=4",
>>> >       "last": "/an-issue/comments?page=498",
>>> >     }
>>> >   }
>>>
>>> Would TFP would also use paging as described here? If so, I think that
>>> API spec(s) which belong to Social WG deliverables, as well as ones
>>> belonging to Annotation WG deliverables could also simply build on that!
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rob Sanderson
>> Information Standards Advocate
>> Digital Library Systems and Services
>> Stanford, CA 94305
>>
>
>


-- 
Rob Sanderson
Information Standards Advocate
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305