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

Re: paging in editor's draft

From: Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:04:11 -0500
To: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>, "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CE9FC325.124C1%erik.wilde@emc.com>
hello john.

On 2013-11-06, 08:59 , "John Arwe" <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>not sure why that wouldn't make much sense. wouldn't it actually make a
>> lot of sense, if i am building a UI that tried to list 100 entries, i
>>can
>> get sorted pages of 10, but then i have no idea how the 10 are sorted on
>> each page? sequences are not such a great thing to express in RDF, but
>> it's possible, and it seems to me that sorted pages may be a more useful
>Erik, what I had in mind when I wrote the final parenthetical was someone
>believing that the order of "members" in the *serialization* of a single
>page carries significance.  That's what doesn't make much sense in the
>same breath
> as RDF (or Jena as the common implementation).  Certainly one can add it
>to the RDF content if the usage scenario warrants it.

absolutely agreed, order in serialization does not matter, since the only
thing that matters is the model represented in RDF. so what you're saying
is that even though pages clearly do follow some order, entries on a page
are randomly ordered? that's a bit inconsistent and, in many scenarios
that we use, would not be terribly helpful. we have a lot of UI things
driven by interactions with collections, and users do expect both pages as
well as entries within a page to follow the ordering that's matters for
the application.

cheers,

dret.
Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2013 18:04:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:17:46 UTC