Re: how to know that something was DELETEd

I'm not convinced that the WG should take on the work of designing a general purpose RDF-based feed/syndication mechanism. We have enough on our plate.

Richard


On 27 Mar 2013, at 18:52, "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com> wrote:

> hello richard.
> 
> On 2013-03-27 11:36 , "Richard Cyganiak" <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:
>> What are the entries in those feeds? Generic RDF payloads? Specific RDF
>> payloads? Something else?
> 
> i don't think that should matter for us at all, because we want to be a
> platform (i.e., provide LDP services for clients that are managing any
> kind of resources, whatever they may be). the entries are LDP resources
> (maybe exposing the "updated" timestamp), the content is what matters most
> to PROV.
> 
> in this particular case, i would expect the content to be provenance
> statements in RDF, and a client POSTing such a resource would use the
> PROV-DM vocabulary, for example informing the pingback container that it
> just used something
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-prov-dm-20130312/#term-Usage). then somebody
> GETting the pingback container would see such a new entry (assuming it's
> sorted by update, a conditional GET would thus actually result in a new
> container representation, and the client would see that there is one new
> member URI it hasn't seen before), could GET the PROV pingback resource if
> they're interested in the details of what happened, and would thus
> understand that the a new PROV used() event happened. i am sure i did get
> some/many of the PROV details wrong here, but in terms of general
> interactions, this is how i think it could work.
> 
> for DELETE (just making sure the subject is mentioned) we would not have
> any support, though, because that would require some special property in
> the container that, in the time-sorted list of members would represent the
> fact that this member has been DELETEd. but maybe the whole DELETE story
> doesn't matter to PROV, it all depends on their scenarios.
> 
> cheers,
> 
> dret.
>

Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 20:55:34 UTC