Re: ldp-ISSUE-45: POSTing to an LDPR appends content to the resource [Linked Data Platform core]

On 20/01/13 15:20, Wilde, Erik wrote:
> hello all.
>
> On 2013-01-18 22:11 , "Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Issue
> Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>> ldp-ISSUE-45: POSTing to an LDPR appends content to the resource [Linked
>> Data Platform core]
>> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/45
>> Raised by: Arnaud Le Hors
>> On product: Linked Data Platform core
>> Andy suggested that "it would be valuable to be explicit that POST to
>> LDP-R is add triples"
>> See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Jan/0115.html
>
> that's one way to go, but please keep in mind that if we define implicit
> semantics for a POST to be an add, we cannot do anything else with POST.
> that's fine from the REST model point of view, it just limits the things
> we might want to POST. another possible option would be the following:
>
> - keep POST as the catch-all and define a framework that is able to use
> POST for various interactions, not just for "add".

For the media types for RDF, I don't see what other interactions there 
are, without it being a service (non-REST) invocation mechanism?  Erik - 
what had you in mind?

POST + other media types, the interactions can be different.

> - instead of folding "add" into POST, maybe use PATCH and use a media type
> that is able to PATCH RDF, so that by sending a PATCH request, clients can
> actually add/modify/remove triples?

For the media types for RDF, I think removal (sending "negative" 
triples) is going to cause problems with expression.  A graph is not 
just a syntactic container of syntactic triples (and then there are 
bNodes!).

> if we go this way (a big if), the downside is that such a media type
> currently does not exist, and thus we would have to invent it (probably
> not a good idea for our group), or add it as a dependency and assume that
> hopefully rather sooner than later, RDF will have a PATCH model we can
> refer to.

application/sparql-update ?

A bit heavy - a subset like just INSERT DATA / DELETE DATA of triples 
(this is a generalization of the Talis changeset idea) might be useful 
to define.

[But you could POST application/sparql-update as well.]

	Andy

>
> cheers,
>
> dret.
>
>

Received on Sunday, 20 January 2013 17:38:31 UTC