Re: [dxwg] Profile negotiation [RPFN]

Here is how I'm thinking of the web engineering terms in our discussion, 
from Fielding [1].

*Table 5-1: REST Data Elements* Data Element  Modern Web Examples
resource  the intended conceptual target of a hypertext reference
resource identifier  URL, URN
representation  HTML document, JPEG image
representation metadata  media type, last-modified time
resource metadata  source link, alternates, vary
control data  if-modified-since, cache-control


[1] https://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm

On 6/12/18 8:02 AM, Ruben Verborgh via GitHub wrote:
>> Yes, my serialization is your media type.
>
> That might be a bit confusing then, because a serialization
> (as in "a concrete series of bytes representing a dataset")
> would be determined by multiple factors,
> such as media type, language, and profile.
>
>> "It might or might not have its own identifier " - if there is no 
>> identifier, how will it be accessed/transmitted?
>
> Access through the non-negotiated identifier;
> indicate your preferences in headers.
> The server replies with the negotiated response.
>
>> but any resource on the web has an identifier for the resource, not 
>> just the work.
>
> Any resource on the Web *can* have an identifier.
>
>> I don't know DCAT terribly well but this seems to be a difference 
>> between dataset and distribution.
>
> A distribution is a representation of a dataset.
>
>> So as long as the URI for the dataset refers to an abstraction, that 
>> makes sense, but I'm not clear on what the non-abstraction consists of.
>
> It refers to the dataset.
>
> Ruben
>

-- 
Annette Greiner
NERSC Data and Analytics Services
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory