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

Re: LDP user story: sharing binary resources and metadata

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:19:55 +0100
Message-ID: <504E213B.8020806@epimorphics.com>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org

On 10/09/12 17:39, Steve K Speicher wrote:
> "4.1.3 BPR servers MAY host a mixture of BPRs and non-BPRs. For example,
> it is common for BPR servers to need to host binary or text resources that
> do not have useful RDF representations."
> http://www.w3.org/Submission/ldbp/#bpr-general

This is good because Henry's UC is, to my reading, closing in on the 
fact that the "resource" comes in two parts - here, the image and 
information about the image (which may in the image file but better 
external to it as it's more general).

A key issue for our work is whether to link these two elements or treat 
them separately:

Coupled: e.g. allow a single POST/PUT with RDF and non-RDF parts, and 
have the BPR server manage the URI naming for the non-RDF part.

Separate: e.g. require the image to be put somewhere with a URL, then 
receive just the metadata as a BPR.

I'd like to go down the coupled direction unless there is a barrier 
because the separate case places a co-ordination burden on the client 
apps.  Whether the binary part is subsidiary to the RDF part, I don't 
know what the pros an cons are.  At the moment though, I don't see it as 
a significant extra work item and still about "protocol".

Received on Monday, 10 September 2012 17:20:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:17:31 UTC