- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz <tomasz@t-code.pl>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 22:22:14 +0200
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: "public-hydra@w3.org" <public-hydra@w3.org>
Hi Markus On JSON-LD list you wrote: Yeah, to really get every possible operation and link, you would need to reference all of them. I'm still a bit on the fence about that because it is extremely inefficient in most cases. I was thinking about adding a statement to the spec that basically requires all links and operations to be declared either in the ApiDocumentation or inline so that there are only those two places for a client to look at. Of course people can place information also directly in vocabularies but then it wouldn't be guaranteed that those things are discovered *unless* they are also referenced by a apiDocumentation HTTP Link header. I'm conerned about (object) properties, which are not links. They will most likely make up for most of the resources. I guess it wouldn't be wise to try to dereference each one of them to see whether they are typed as hydra:Links. Or would it? Hm, and you also consider an idea that Hydra clients should not actually dereference classes but only the ApiDocumentation, declared in HTTP header? Lastly what has just occured to me is that the ApiDocumentation would have to be dereferenced at every request, is that right? Due to its dynamic nature. Regards, Tom
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2014 20:23:44 UTC