W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > April 2013

Re: Question regarding POST versus PUT for creating an LDPC

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 03:41:11 -0400 (EDT)
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
cc: Cody Burleson <cody.burleson@base22.com>, Linked Data Platform WG <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304180337360.9941@wnl.j3.bet>
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:

>> Sorry - I know I'm not really contributing yet, but rather - just asking
>> more questions. But I think, perhaps, that once I get my code up to a point
>> where it's starting to have good coverage, it may start to reveal some real
>> questions and issues that could add value. So, bear with me (and be gentle).
>
> If the client knows or has control over the name of the resource to be
> created, it should PUT the contents to the new location. There are
> several problems with this caveat:
>
> 1 PUTting a resource names that aren't cryptographically unique means
>  it's likely that some client has already created that resource,
>  e.g. all clients try all the time to create container/item1.

If-None-Match: * is your friend here, but yes, deriving useful names is an 
issue that a factory handle better.

> 2 The server implementation might constrain the names of the resources
>  it can store and serve, e.g. one backed by a database which stores
>  only an integer which it concatonates unto "container/item".
>
> For these reasons, LDP also supports the common web convention of
> POSTing to a factory to create new resources. In LDP's case, that
> factory is called a container and there is a prescribed protocol and
> media language for talking to it.
>
> Hope I answered the right question.
>
>
>> --
>> Cody Burleson
>
>

-- 
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.

         ~~Yves
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 07:41:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:46 UTC