Re: [Specifications] Actions with explicit target

I like your snippets @lanthaler, I could update this PR to reflect it! If we would merge it at some point, the we would have to update all the other snippets to separate actions from handlers (operations).

> I introduced **action** and **request**. I'm quite unhappy with the name of the latter but couldn't come up with something better yet (handler might work but I didn't like it too much either). 

I recall an old Activity Streams 2.0 related draft which never even made it to Workin Draft stage, I have a copy of it on http://elf-pavlik.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams2-actions.html it uses concept of actions and handlers. Since property names should describe meaning of the relation we could even consider names like *handledWith* (instead of *request*) and *affords* (instead of *action*). Also if we separate actions from handlers (operations). Resources would most likely reference actions directly via *action* / *affords* and possibly not reference handlers directly via *operation* / *`"@reverse": "target"`*.
As one of major gains in this change I see the uniform discovery of all the actions via *affords* / *action*, no matter which resource handlers of those actions specify as their *target*. So *operation* (property) would rarely get used its original direction and pretty much always the reverse direction - *target* would get used to relate action to its handler (operation).

---

Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 3 unresolved discussions.

---

*[drafts/use-cases/5.1.creating-event-with-put.md, line 67 at r1](https://reviewable.io:443/reviews/hydracg/specifications/154#-L2FGn5gasTIWY81_mpI:-L4RGRxI5hGjb2oXg4Hz:b-xgk27d) ([raw file](https://github.com/hydracg/specifications/blob/aa28c5c639dde02c9aacfaf7f5d7121b0d7caa3b/drafts/use-cases/5.1.creating-event-with-put.md#L67)):*
<details><summary><i>Previously, lanthaler (Markus Lanthaler) wrote…</i></summary><blockquote>

No, I meant that you removed `memberTemplate` which describes the URL space to clients and allows, e.g., direct lookups, without introducing an alternative to enable the same.
</blockquote></details>

I don't think any of current use cases exemplifies requirement for such 'direct lookups'. Maybe until someone proposes (via PR) a clear use case for such 'direct lookups', we will not try to deal with that requirement?

---


*Comments from [Reviewable](https://reviewable.io:443/reviews/hydracg/specifications/154#-:-L4RC-LyajGxOATMieEi:b-o5g9x7)*
<!-- Sent from Reviewable.io -->


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by elf-pavlik
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/pull/154#issuecomment-362822250 using your GitHub account

Received on Saturday, 3 February 2018 15:29:40 UTC