- From: Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:44:27 -0800
- To: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
My thought was to make container properties extensible and use the mechanism in 5.1.2 to retrieve whatever the implementation defined All the best, Ashok On 11/19/2012 4:36 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote: > hello ashok. > > On 2012-11-19 14:26 , "Ashok Malhotra"<ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote: >> Section 5.1.2 discusses retrieving non-member properties of a container. >> It says: >> "The example listed here only show a simple case where only a few simple >> non-member properties are retrieved. In real world situations more >> complex cases are likely, such as those that add other predicates to >> containers, ..." >> I am assuming, and others please correct me if I am wrong, that the >> container can have other >> non-member properties defined such as, number of members, owenr, date of >> creation, etc. >> and these properties can be retrieved in the same manner. > that looks like a good place where such a concept might be attached, but > we would still need to define them to be meaningful at the protocol level. > or we don't do that for now, and it's an interesting thing to keep in mind > for LDP++. essentially, that's the same pattern that Atom followed: > choosing the minimal useful and extensible design, and then let a thousand > extensions bloom... http://dret.typepad.com/dretblog/atom-landscape.html > > cheers, > > dret. >
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2012 00:45:08 UTC