Re: ISSUE-37: short description of model

hello roger.

On 2013-02-27 23:09 , "Roger Menday" <Roger.Menday@uk.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>I am kind of wary of using 'links' because it might be interpreted purely
>as 'actionable links'. I am referring to "what" happens - which is that
>the shape of the graph is changed - where the shape is defined by the
>resources and their properties/attributes/links/arcs/etc... The "how" is
>then the hypermedia controls (including links, forms), etc.

a link being actionable is almost the definition of hypermedia, is it not?
so from my point of view, defining links as those ones that drive an
application is in line with the hypermedia and REST notion of what a link
is for.

maybe the problem is the following: when i say "link", i am driven by my
understanding of link being affordances for interactions, so links are
*only* those "arcs" that are intended to be followed as part of the
application flow. it's what a media types defines as links in the
vocabulary it is defining. if we had hyperRDF, we would have a framework
for this, but since we don't, we'll have to define ourselves which of the
"arcs" are links, and which aren't.

>In the above I would add, "actionable link *or form*"
>Or this that implied ... i.e. a form directs some action via a link (??)

a form is an actionable link, just like any other. it simply has rules
attached to it (defined by the media type) what a client should do when
following that link. so i guess you could argue that a form link is a bit
more complex in its interaction semantics, but that's it.

>http://km.aifb.kit.edu/projects/numbers/web/n42
>But, I know what you mean, and it is potentially mis-leading in
>conjunction with the word 'link'  But you can "arc" to it :)

but that's not the number 42, it's some URI. for a link to be meaningful
when taken out of context, the target needs to use a scheme that is
context-free, so that i can bookmark that link or maybe send the
identifier to somebody else and tell them "interact with this resource to
achieve some result." but i think this discussion is not central to the
other issues.

cheers,

dret.

Received on Thursday, 28 February 2013 10:09:08 UTC