- From: Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 12:05:12 -0400
- To: "ashok.malhotra@oracle.com" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- CC: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-11-01, 03:59 , "Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote: >On 11/1/2013 1:04 AM, Wilde, Erik wrote: >> to me, the whole idea that there is some "natural order" to a >>collection leads to all kinds of false assumptions. a collection is a >>set, so there is no such thing as "inserting in the middle of it". >We have the ability to order members of a collection. See 5..1.3. >This makes the collection a sequence. does it? you can have views ordered in a variety of ways (and could add a a layer on top of LDP asking an LDP server to provide differently sorted views of the same collection), but inherently, i would argue, the underlying collection still *is* a set. ³inserting new data into a view² to me is a weird concept. even with o:value, ordering is not fully defined, because ordering depends on more than just values. it depends on value types, and sort rules defined on those types. i donıt think we should even try to answer those questions, but i think it demonstrates that ordering is a server-controlled concept that is not fully exposed, and cannot be used for anything other than server-controlled representations (such as ordered pages). cheers, dret.
Received on Friday, 1 November 2013 16:06:07 UTC