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

Re: An IRC discussion with Alexandre Bertails re SSUE-19:

From: Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 14:26:34 +0100
CC: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>, Linked Data Platform Working Group <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C86017FB-2CA9-414A-A97E-C5E4B21967A5@uk.fujitsu.com>
To: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>

>> So I guess I disagree with Alexandre, who seems to think we can not succeed without a new media type.
>> The way I see it, this group is actually *augmenting* the meaning of the Turtle media type (and probably other RDF media-types), by providing it with interaction semantics, captured by the LDP vocabulary.
>> More precisely, to answer Alexandre's questions: 
>> > * how do I know that <foo> is an LDPR?
>> Well, any resource that yields a Turtle representation becomes de facto an LDPR (even if read-only).

I think so too.

Then, if client discovers an linked LDPC, then this is the clue that it is a writable resource. 

> Perhaps. Not sure. That seems to be too miniamlistic an interpretation of an LDPR.

>> > * how do I know that <foo> is neither an LDPC nor an LDPR?
>> See above: if it yields Turtle, it *is* and LDPR.
>> (granted, it would be useful to be able to tell the difference btw a read-only and a PUTable LDPR, though)
>> > * how do I know that I can interact with <foo> using the SPARQL Graph Protocol?
>> Is that in our scope? If so, I guess we should have a class or a property to state that about a given resource.
>> > * if I find out that <foo> a ldp:Container while looking at <bar>,
>> >  should I consider this information as authoritative?
>> Well, when you find the following HTML
>>   <form action="foo" method="foo">
>> at <bar>, do you believe it? Do you try and perform a POST on <foo>?
>> I guess the answer is the same: if you trust the source, then yes, you're allowed to start interacting with <bar> as if it were an LDPC.

When a form is submitted, the processor (indicated by the 'action' parameter) is doing something pretty similar to a LDPC. I suppose the HTML equivalent of issue-73, would be "list all of requests that have been processed". For me, this isn't very interesting because the information I need is in the documents I am browsing.  


Received on Thursday, 6 June 2013 13:27:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:51 UTC