- From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@ulsberg.no>
- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 09:25:09 +0100
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: Hydra <public-hydra@w3.org>
2015-11-01 18:57 GMT+01:00 Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>: > I don't think having different predicates for different logical operators > scales. Especially not if you consider that the number of parameters varies. > So we should come up with something else. OData specifies 10 logical operators[1]. I'm not saying that list is necessarily complete, but it's enough to be a good distance within the 80/20 rule. Would you say that having one predicate per such operator is too much? > IMO, hydra:filter describes the purpose of the referenced IRI templated very > well. I would thus propose to stick to it for the time being and explore > design that allow to make the IriTemplate at the other end more expressive. I'm not sure IRI templates are expressive enough to solve the problem at hand. It would be awesome if I could stuff an IRI template inside my hydra:ApiDocumentation that supported the full range of OData Query Options[2] (which is what many of my APIs support), but I don't think that's possible. > [...] > > Any other ideas? Yes. Use OData Query Options. :) ____ [1] http://docs.oasis-open.org/odata/odata/v4.0/csprd02/part2-url-conventions/odata-v4.0-csprd02-part2-url-conventions.html#_Toc360800758 [2] http://docs.oasis-open.org/odata/odata/v4.0/csprd02/part2-url-conventions/odata-v4.0-csprd02-part2-url-conventions.html#_Toc360800755 -- Asbjørn Ulsberg -=|=- asbjorn@ulsberg.no «He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
Received on Monday, 9 November 2015 08:25:38 UTC