- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz <tomasz@t-code.pl>
- Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 13:07:09 +0200
- To: public-hydra@w3.org
I think that such use cases should be modelled more with link relations in mind. And in a sense Operation too is a kind of link. Just invoked a little bit differently with the HTTP protocol. If we model interactions with links in mind, I expect it also to influence the client library. On 2016-06-18 10:36, Dietrich Schulten wrote: >> >> > 4. As a programmer, I want to use the client to POST to the API by >> > giving it linked data to POST and a path of predicates which leads to a >> > representation that has a POST hydra operation. >> > First the term "to POST to the API" is misleading. What you are doing is posting representation to a resource. After all, what is the API? Also "path of predicates" is too RDF-centric. Could we just call them links? How about instead we phrase such interactions like below? The example could be from a collection resource. 1. As a client, I want to follow the Link relation 'next' of my resource representation (this would naturally mean a GET with HTTP) 2. As a client, I want to invoke the operation 'AddElement' (this would mean whatever the Hydra documentation+representation defines) Regards, Tom
Received on Saturday, 18 June 2016 11:07:45 UTC