- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 09:33:09 +0100
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
On 4 Feb 2015 at 09:09, Tomasz Pluskiewicz wrote: > Hi everyone > > I think we're all revolving around similar goals and issues in a peculiar dance, without > explicitly agreeing nor disagreeing. > > Having read the recent discussions it occurs to me that we all agree only that large > collections need to be broken into smaller pages, which is kind natural. I like Ruben's idea > on how to improve that design. However there are multiple ideas for defining links between > those pages. I can think of 4 (which can be combined too) > > 1. first, last, next, previous Let's try to focus on this for the time being as it is the most basic control. We can introduce more sophisticated controls later. But each of the following controls can be transformed into first, next, previous, last while the opposite isn't true. > 2. offset, limit > 3. a number of direct links to nearest pages (seen commonly) > 4. template based > My proposal is that maybe we shouldn't define any explicit terms for those link in the core > Hydra vocabulary. If we keep the current next,last,etc properties it seems to suggest to > newcomers that this is "the right way" for designing partial collections. Having said that I > see where Andrew's email comes from. It is the most basic form. The only way to achieve interoperability is to define some controls. We may end up having just those basic controls or we may end up supporting also more sophisticated ones.. but we definitely need some to be able to create interoperable clients/servers. I don't want to cut off the discussion but let's try to stay focused and tackle this step by step; starting with next/previous/... Cheers, Markus -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2015 08:33:40 UTC