- From: Karol Szczepański <karol.szczepanski@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 20:08:46 +0100
- To: "Maxim Kolchin" <kolchinmax@gmail.com>, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: <public-hydra@w3.org>
Hi Maxim
>I just wanted to show two options which I'm considering. I was
>considering Collection as an option, because both collection and
>stream are set of members. Although they probably should be disjoint
>classes, because collection should (or may) be navigateable (with the
>first and last links and others) and stream is definitely not.
I was wondering whether you need to subclass anything. WebSocket streams are
using different Url scheme ("ws" I think), thus it's already descriptive
enough to make a distinction between the calling protocol of such a
resource.
As for acknowledging it as a collection - indeed it's an ... unhealthy
approach. Navigation is not the only issue - the stream may give different
response each time you connect to it, thus the only fact that supports the
approach of a collection being there is that the stream serves messages,
making it effectively a collection of messages.
I think knowing that this is a resource callable over WebSockets protocol is
enough to tell the client that it is a stream (collection?) of messages.
Regards
Karol Szczepański
Received on Monday, 30 November 2015 19:09:12 UTC