- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 22:49:52 +0100
- To: <public-linked-data-fragments@w3.org>
On 3 Nov 2015 at 21:37, Ruben Verborgh wrote: > Hi Dietrich, > >>>> Why not simply "the next link SHOULD NOT point to an empty fragment"? >> >> Is there a reason why the 'next' link would not simply be unavailable when there are no > more data, i.e. it would not be present at all? > > Yes, that's actually what we wanted to say. > but perhaps this is not clear enough. It's taken a bit out of context here. >> The sentence above may be read as "the next link should not point to an empty fragment, > but must point to some other item", leaving open which item that would be. > > Agree. What do you think about the text that is currently in the spec? > > - If a previous page directly precedes the page, this page must link to it using > hydra:previous. The previous page should not be empty. > - If a next page directly follows the page, this page must link to it using hydra:next. The > next page should not be empty. > => http://www.hydra-cg.com/spec/latest/triple-pattern-fragments/#paging I find this clear but a bit clumsy. What about something along the lines of this If there exists a page following the current page, it MUST be referenced from the current page using hydra:next. A page referenced by hydra:next SHOULD NOT be empty. Still needs some wordsmithing but I think the gist is clear. Should we really talk about pages here? What about talking about fragments, partial fragments, fragment views or something similar instead? -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Thursday, 5 November 2015 21:50:20 UTC