public-hydra@w3.org from February 2014 by date

Friday, 28 February 2014

• RE: removing hydra:search Markus Lanthaler
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler

Thursday, 27 February 2014

• Re: ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Savas Parastatidis

Friday, 28 February 2014

• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Markus Lanthaler
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler

Wednesday, 26 February 2014

• Re: ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Sam Goto

Saturday, 22 February 2014

• Re: Singularization of properties and its consequences (ISSUE-25, ISSUE-27 & ISSUE-28) Ruben Verborgh
• RE: Singularization of properties and its consequences (ISSUE-25, ISSUE-27 & ISSUE-28) Markus Lanthaler

Friday, 21 February 2014

• Re: ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Sam Goto
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Mark Baker

Thursday, 20 February 2014

• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Thomas Hoppe
• Re: removing hydra:search Thomas Hoppe

Wednesday, 19 February 2014

• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: removing hydra:search Ruben Verborgh
• Re: removing hydra:search Ruben Verborgh

Tuesday, 18 February 2014

• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Thomas Hoppe
• Re: removing hydra:search Thomas Hoppe
• Re: removing hydra:search Thomas Hoppe
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Ryan J. McDonough
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Markus Lanthaler

Monday, 17 February 2014

• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Ryan J. McDonough
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh
• RE: ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Markus Lanthaler
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh
• RE: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Singularization of properties and its consequences (ISSUE-25, ISSUE-27 & ISSUE-28) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: removing hydra:search Markus Lanthaler

Sunday, 16 February 2014

• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Ryan J. McDonough
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Thomas Hoppe

Saturday, 15 February 2014

• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Ryan J. McDonough
• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Thomas Hoppe
• Re: StatusCodeDescription vs. Status (ISSUE-32) Thomas Hoppe
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Thomas Hoppe
• Hydra Vocab and Content Negotiation Kingsley Idehen
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Ryan J. McDonough

Friday, 14 February 2014

• Re: Nested structures / ISSUE-26 Sam Goto
• Re: Nested structures / ISSUE-26 Kingsley Idehen
• Re: ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Sam Goto
• RE: ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Nested structures / ISSUE-26 (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: Singularization of properties and its consequences (ISSUE-25, ISSUE-27 & ISSUE-28) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: removing hydra:search Ruben Verborgh
• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: removing hydra:search Thomas Hoppe
• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Thomas Hoppe
• ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Sam Goto
• Re: Nested structures / ISSUE-26 (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Sam Goto

Thursday, 13 February 2014

• RE: W3C standardization process Markus Lanthaler
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: W3C standardization process James Langley
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh

Wednesday, 12 February 2014

• Re: removing hydra:search Ruben Verborgh
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Thomas Hoppe
• RE: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Mark Baker

Tuesday, 11 February 2014

• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh
• RE: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: StatusCodeDescription vs. Status (ISSUE-32) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Gregg Kellogg
• Re: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal Kingsley Idehen
• Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Ruben Verborgh
• RE: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal Markus Lanthaler
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Ruben Verborgh
• Re: StatusCodeDescription vs. Status (ISSUE-32) Thomas Hoppe

Monday, 10 February 2014

• RE: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal Markus Lanthaler
• Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Interoperability with Linked Data Platform (especially regarding collections and paging) ISSUE-36 Markus Lanthaler
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Gregg Kellogg
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Ruben Verborgh
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Thomas Hoppe
• Re: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal Sam Goto
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Ruben Verborgh
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Thomas Hoppe
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Kingsley Idehen
• Re: StatusCodeDescription vs. Status (ISSUE-32) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Ruben Verborgh
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh

Sunday, 9 February 2014

• Interoperability with Linked Data Platform (especially regarding collections and paging) Andreas Kuckartz
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler
• StatusCodeDescription vs. Status (ISSUE-32) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Markus Lanthaler
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler

Friday, 7 February 2014

• Re: Unsubscribing Andreas Kuckartz
• Unsubscribing Andreas Kuckartz
• RE: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Markus Lanthaler
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? Kingsley Idehen
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Ryan J. McDonough

Thursday, 6 February 2014

• Re: Singularization of properties and its consequences (ISSUE-25, ISSUE-27 & ISSUE-28) Thomas Hoppe
• Re: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Thomas Hoppe
• Re: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Judson Lester
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Ruben Verborgh
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Gregg Kellogg
• RE: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Markus Lanthaler
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Markus Lanthaler
• Re: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Judson Lester
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings (ISSUE-30) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: Singularization of properties and its consequences (ISSUE-25, ISSUE-27 & ISSUE-28) Kingsley Idehen
• Singularization of properties and its consequences (ISSUE-25, ISSUE-27 & ISSUE-28) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Thomas Hoppe
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Ruben Verborgh
• Re: Properties and types differing only in their capitalization ISSUE-28 (was: plural properties should become singular) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Thomas Hoppe
• Re: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Thomas Hoppe
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Mark Baker

Wednesday, 5 February 2014

• RE: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Markus Lanthaler
• RE: plural properties should become singular Markus Lanthaler
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Kingsley Idehen
• RE: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Markus Lanthaler
• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Ruben Verborgh
• Re: concerns about hydra:mappings Ruben Verborgh
• Re: Properties and types differing only in their capitalization ISSUE-28 (was: plural properties should become singular) Ruben Verborgh
• Re: plural properties should become singular Kingsley Idehen
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Ryan J. McDonough
• Re: plural properties should become singular Ruben Verborgh
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Thomas Hoppe
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Ryan J. McDonough
• Re: ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Ryan J. McDonough

Tuesday, 4 February 2014

• Re: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Thomas Hoppe
• RE: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Paul Kuykendall
• RE: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Markus Lanthaler
• Re: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Gregg Kellogg
• Re: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Kingsley Idehen
• Re: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Gregg Kellogg
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Kingsley Idehen
• RE: Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Markus Lanthaler
• FW: An updated draft of the schema.org/Actions proposal! Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Markus Lanthaler
• RE: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Markus Lanthaler
• Re: ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? Kingsley Idehen
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Kingsley Idehen
• RE: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Markus Lanthaler
• ISSUE-32: Should hydra:returns and hydra:statusCodes be removed to avoid tight coupling? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Kingsley Idehen
• ISSUE-31: Are Operations violating REST's uniform interface constraint? (was: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Markus Lanthaler
• Re: My opinion about hydra vocabulary László Lajos Jánszky
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Ryan J. McDonough
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Ryan J. McDonough

Monday, 3 February 2014

• Reconciling hydra rest semantics for collections with typical RDF entity relationships Gregg Kellogg
• Re: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Thomas Hoppe
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Kingsley Idehen
• RE: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Paul Kuykendall
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Kingsley Idehen
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Gregg Kellogg
• RE: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Markus Lanthaler
• Re: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Kingsley Idehen
• RE: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Markus Lanthaler
• RE: More Thoughts on Links and Operation Subclasses Markus Lanthaler
• RE: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Markus Lanthaler
• RE: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Markus Lanthaler
• Re: plural properties should become singular Kingsley Idehen
• RE: concerns about hydra:mappings Markus Lanthaler
• Re: plural properties should become singular Gregg Kellogg
• RE: plural properties should become singular Markus Lanthaler
• Properties and types differing only in their capitalization ISSUE-28 (was: plural properties should become singular) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: Wrap up and Discussion of ways to Specify Supported Properties and corresponding Validation Rules for Operations Markus Lanthaler
• Nested structures / ISSUE-26 (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal) Markus Lanthaler
• RE: My opinion about hydra vocabulary Markus Lanthaler
• RE: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal Markus Lanthaler

Saturday, 1 February 2014

• Re: terminology/necessity of hydra:required Ryan J. McDonough

Last message date: Friday, 28 February 2014 21:08:24 UTC