- From: Karol Szczepański <karol.szczepanski@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 14:04:30 +0100
- To: "Ruben Verborgh" <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>, "Dietrich Schulten" <ds@escalon.de>
- Cc: <public-hydra@w3.org>
>Indeed. Important here is there difference between
> http://example.org{?param}
>and
> http://example.org?param={param}
>Only in the former case can a NIL value cause the parameter to be removed.
>In the second case, we cannot touch "?param=".
True, I had to supplement my knowledge with UriTemplate RFC.
>In general, removing is thus not possible.
>Furthermore, the default behavior of Web browsers for empty form input
>is to append the field name with a zero-length value, not to omit the
>field.
>My proposal is therefore compatible with browser behavior.
Agreed with sticking to browser's behavior, but I'm somehow disagree with
your conclusion on zero-length value.
If server provides a form field it assumes that value always exists - either
an empty string or other value. That value is then used, without focusing on
the fact whether it's an empty string or not. Also server may provide
additional behavior which makes the field dissapear completely from the form
data if it chooses to (i.e. with script attached to the form). This indeed
removes the value which can be concluded as no value is provided.
I'd be really careful with deciding on what's an "empty value". Consider a
typed literal value:
""^^xsd:int
According to RDF 1.1 this is a subject for storing in an RDF graph, but it
is so called ill-typed as it doesn't fit to the lexical space of xsd:int. In
many cases developers uses just 0 to have a "default value" for such
situations as no one want's hellish validation issus when processing the
data later.
Maybe it's worth of considering a default value predicate for mappings?
Regards
Karol
Received on Saturday, 31 October 2015 13:05:01 UTC