RE: Moving forward with ISSUE-30 (IRI template expansion)

I would like to send out a new call for consensus for ISSUE-30 [1] early
next week.

AFAICT, the majority of the group prefers an extensible approach using
something like hydra:expansionMechanism instead of having just a flag.
Regarding the proposed ExpandedRepresentation (do we have a better name for
this?) two hats (^^) seem to be preferred over something like $ even though
the syntax *won't* be Turtle compatible. I'm quite uneasy about this as I
see it as source of lots of confusion in the future. Especially if we ever
decide to add a TurtleRepresentation.

So, I guess to proceed we need to find answers to the following questions:

1) Do we want the new property to be called
  a) expansionMechanism,
  b) variableExpansion, or
  c) variableRespresentation?

I opt for variableRepresentation as it sounds most declarative and also
indicates that this affects only the representation of the variables in the
template, nothing else.


2) What do we call the expanded value representation (mechanism described in
[2])?
  a) ExpandedRepresentation
  b) CompleteRepresentation
  c) something else?

I'm leaning towards b) but am open for better names.


3) Do we really want to use two hats (^^) in the expanded representation
knowing that we might introduce a Turtle representation in the future which
will make it difficult to distinguish them by just looking at the resulting
URL? Also unlike "$", the character "^" isn't allowed in a URL and needs to
be escaped [3] to %5E.
  a) use one hat (^)
  b) use two hats as Turtle does (^^)
  c) use another character such as $ which doesn't need to be escaped

I strongly favor c)


Thanks and a nice weekend to everyone,
Markus


[1] https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/30
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra/2014Jul/0083.html
[3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-2


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Friday, 8 August 2014 10:07:42 UTC