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

Editor's draft updated to reflect all pending resolutions

From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:02:27 -0500
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF400540B1.F45E76FF-ON85257C24.00521A4A-85257C24.00529F47@us.ibm.com>
 Barring me missing something, of course.. ;-)

Action-112/114: predicate names

Action-113 : remove 209/303 and have clients detect links via headers.

I did what I think is a fairly complete first pass at the 209 > 200 
effects.  With the "first page" normally having the same URL as the 
"resource being paged", I'm not sure to what degree my relatively elegant 
model (PIMO) of "paged resource" vs "single-page resource" is still useful 
vs adding confusion, so I took a RFC5005-style approach.

Big animal changes:
first ==> MUST to MAY
collection ==> MUST to completely removed
"xyz page link" += definitions, which helped put the paging text on a diet

Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 15:02:59 UTC

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