- From: Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 14:38:37 -0400
- To: "Armin.Haller@csiro.au" <Armin.Haller@csiro.au>, "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
hello armin. >Of course content negotiation can be used to retrieve the different >representations of the same object. However, how does the user know what >representations do exist about this object? ideally, you would expose that RESTfully through link relations, and many RESTful data formats have ways of exposing "alternate" links to resources ("alternate" is one of the registered link relationships in the IANA link registry http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xml). so if you GET a resource, links can be exposed in HTTP, allowing clients to understand the available set of resources. additionally, there's a "describedby" link relation (defined in POWDER), and there's "describes" (draft http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-describes-link), which allow to represent the relationships between described resources and description resources independent of any specific resource representation. this is important, because requiring clients to understand a specific format so that they can decide how to find a format that they support and thus can request would be a bit counterproductive. so my recommendation would be to not encode fundamental discoverability issues like this in a specific format, and instead rely on HTTP and link relations, so that you support a bigger set of clients. cheers, dret.
Received on Monday, 24 September 2012 18:39:29 UTC