- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 19:56:55 +0200
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
On 14 Okt 2014 at 18:51, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Oct 14, 2014, at 3:52 AM, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: > >> On 14 Okt 2014 at 12:38, Ruben Verborgh wrote: >>>> +1, totalItems was always intended to be exact... >>> >>> I'm not sure if this is a good idea. >>> That might be very hard to deal with for some applications; >> >> You should have also included the second paragraph: >> >> ... whatever that means in practice. The thing is that as soon as you >> receive that triple, the server's state may have already changed. I >> would thus prefer to avoid to define it too precisely/strictly. >> >> I agree that it might be difficult for some applications and given >> that we deal with a distributed system it sometimes is actually >> impossible. Nevertheless, I think the expectation for clients >> should be that this is a (reasonably) accurate number. If the >> server returns a collection (non-paged) and includes totalItems it >> wouldn't make much sense if that number doesn't correspond to the >> items in the collection. > > Yes, but it's the paged collection issue that is more challenging. > As totalItems is a property of a PagedCollection, then every page in > the collection also has this. If we imaging a PagedCollection Yes, with the current design that's true. But we don't *require* that totalItems is there. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 14 October 2014 17:57:26 UTC