Re: naming resources - Slug-Header

On Tue, 8 Jan 2013, Henry Story wrote:

>
> On 8 Jan 2013, at 11:54, Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> hi Henry,
>>
>> An alternative proposal might be to just take the rdfs:label (or maybe from list of established vocab for 'labels') from the POSTed body as a 'hint' for a name (?)
>
> That seems to be a compatible proposal.

Well, as soon as you have two ways of doing the same thing, you end up 
dealing with conflicts (setting precedence, be sure that a client that 
uses only RDF is not ignoring the SLUG header etc...). It is far better to 
avoid that kind of duplicates.

  >
> 1. The advantage of the SLUG Header is that it would work with
> a non-rdf resource too.
>
> 2. Your proposal would be to POST a document containing
> Either
>
> (a) a new vocab item
>  <> xxx:proposedTitle "card" .
>    ...
>
> (b) a well known one
>  <> dc:title "Go Seigen's Friends" .
>
> using (a) requires the LDP server to have a
> MUST support for this, because it should really then
> remove that triple if it did not manage to create the file,
> since that triple was intended only to guide the act
> of file creation, not for it to be maintained during the
> whole life of the file. I have a feeling this gets more
> complicated that the Slug header.
>
> using (b) does not seem harmful having the server use
> some dc:title like relation to guide its name creation in case
> there is no Slug Header. But one can see issues with people
> using the same title across a number of files, and it does
> not seem fine grained enough.
>
> Perhaps a deciding factor would be what would happen
> when creating a new Collection. I don't think that there
> we'd be sending some RDF content along.
>
> But perhaps before we look at all the possible proposals
> we should just open an ISSUE so that these answers don't
> get lost?
>
> Henry
>
>
>>
>> Roger
>>
>>> There are many cases when creating resources the user
>>> would like to be able if possible to control the name
>>> of the resource created  at least the last part of it
>>> (excluding the extension). It makes  sense for example
>>> that a foaf profile be named "card" when created in a
>>> collection.
>>>
>>> Do I open an issue for this?
>>>
>>> Since we should give proposals for when we open issues, I
>>> will do so immediately: I propose that for this we just
>>> adopt the SLUG-Header as defined by the Atom Protocol.
>>>
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5023#section-9.7
>>>
>>> Henry
>>>
>>> Social Web Architect
>>> http://bblfish.net/
>>>
>>
>
> A short message from my sponsors: Vive la France!
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>

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

         ~~Yves

Received on Thursday, 10 January 2013 09:39:27 UTC