Re: LDP-NR and Associated LDR-RS

Hi James,

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:59 PM, James Leigh <james@3roundstones.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It is not clear in the spec[1] if the associated LDP-RS should be
> included in the ldp:contains of the container along with the newly
> created LDP-NR. Something like the following phrases would work for me:
>
> If a LDP server creates this associated LDP-RS, it MUST include both as
> members, and indicate the LDP-RS location in the repsonse...
>

This was discussed previously (don't easily have reference) and it was
decided to leave it open.  One of the primary reasons was that it would
have special behavior for containers with mixed content.  Leaving it open
has the nice flexibility for servers to decide its location.  Perhaps some
implementations will have a separate container with just these LDP-RS'.
Perhaps would help to add some non-normative statement to clarify that LDP
does require the associated LDP-RS to be a member of the container.

Another point, adding a MUST clause at this point in the process would
require us to issue another Last Call, update the test suite, have impls
updated, etc.  I believe the WG is trying had to avoid this, unless of
course this is a strong need for it.

Regards,
Steve


>
> Thanks,
> James
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/#ldpc-post-createbinlinkmetahdr
> 5.2.3.12 Upon successful creation of an LDP-NR (HTTP status code of
> 201-Created and URI indicated by Location response header), LDP servers
> MAY create an associated LDP-RS to contain data about the newly created
> LDP-NR. If a LDP server creates this associated LDP-RS, it MUST indicate
> its location in the response by adding a HTTP Link header with a context
> URI identifying the newly created LDP-NR (instead of the effective
> request URI), a link relation value of describedby, and a target URI
> identifying the associated LDP-RS resource [RFC5988].
>
>
>