Re: optimizing container pages serialization to enable streaming

On 2013-11-11, 10:18 , "Alexandre Bertails" <bertails@w3.org> wrote:
>On 11/11/2013 12:48 PM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>). While strictly true, the issue here is not monotonicity but
>> pragmatic ordered serialization to enable a client to interpret
>> the data as it arrives. Let's call that "streaming".
>Why am I thinking that specifying an order on the streamed RDF triples
>does not feel like RDF anymore?

is it really the case that LDP is attempting to put constraints on RDF
beyond the RDF model and serializations? if yes, i'd like to point out
that this might not be such a great idea. this would disallow the use to
standard RDF serializers that (rightfully so) do not allow to control
these aspects that RDF does not constrain in any way.

it reminds me a little bit of XML's early years when out of convenience,
some specs would constrain XML in ways beyond the XML spec (there are many
way of doing that, for example requiring attributes to be sorted by name,
or disallowing character entities). this led to *a lot* of breakage that
was impossible to fix without rebuilding whole software stacks. i may be
misreading this thread, but if LDP attempts to constrain any RDF syntax in
any way, i think that would be a Really Bad Idea.

cheers,

dret.

Received on Monday, 11 November 2013 18:25:53 UTC