W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > October 2012

ldp-ISSUE-16 (stevebattle): Redirection of non-information resources to BPRs [Use Cases and Requirements]

From: LDP <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 21:09:02 +0000
Message-Id: <E1TJWBi-0004N6-MA@tibor.w3.org>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
ldp-ISSUE-16 (stevebattle): Redirection of non-information resources to BPRs  [Use Cases and Requirements]

http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/16

Raised by: Steve Battle
On product: Use Cases and Requirements

See <http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Use_Cases_And_Requirements#UC-BPR1:_Retrieve_RDF_representation_of_a_resource>

Should the LDP support the redirection of non-information resources to BPRs?
(of course, the host on the non-information URI must be that of the LDP).

Do we use POWDER wdrs:describedby to make the relationship explicit in the RDF?

eg. :alice a foaf:Person; wdrs:describedby :alice.rdf.

I assume the RDF response to alice.rdf should include descriptions of both the information and non-information resources (since metadata about the non-information resource can't be accessed directly). ie. the type of :alice. Although the ETag relates specifically to the information resource.

What if the information resource is hosted on a different server and the LDP holds RDF metadata about the non-information resource? 

e.g. <http://example.com/alice> a foaf:Person; wdrs:describedby <http://example.org/alice.rdf>.

a) Should the LDP simply redirect the client to <http://example.org/alice.rdf>? local metadata about non-information resource alice is lost.

b) Should the LDP GET the RDF from <http://example.org/alice.rdf> and merge it with the local RDF? The Content-Location could be added to the response - or is that misleading?
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 21:09:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:17:32 UTC