Re: Accept-Post submission and call for implementation info

Hi Andrei,

On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Here is the description for my implementation of Accept-Post header:
>
> - The organization responsible for the implementation, if any.
> No particular organization. The work done is part of project RWW.I/O (
> https://rww.io/).
>
> - The implementation's name and/or a link to a web page describing the
> implementation.
> RWW.I/O - personal linked data storage.
>
> - A brief general description.
> A minimal support for LDP is now included in RWW.I/O, which is a personal
> linked data storage space, following the structure of a unix file system.
> Currently, only LDPCs are supported, since the LDPRs are always files or
> directories that are being managed through RESTful operations. RWW.I/O
> encourages the use of .meta files to semantically describe non-LD resources
> (e.g. images, html, js, css, etc.), and the use of .acl files for access
> control rules using the WAC vocabulary. Both .meta and .acl should be used
> per file (i.e. photo.jpg will have a .meta.photo.jpg and a .acl.photo.jpg).
>
> - The implementation's level of maturity: research, prototype, alpha,
> beta, production, widely used, etc.
> Beta until more features from LDP spec are included (if necessary).
>
> - Coverage: which parts of the protocol specification are implemented and
> which versions of the Internet-Draft were implemented.
> LDPCs on the server side, pagination and Accept-Post header.
> You can test LDPC support like this: curl -H "Accept: text/turtle"
> https://deiu.rww.io/public/?p=1
> You can test Accept-Post header like this: curl -v -X OPTIONS -H "Accept:
> text/turtle" https://deiu.rww.io/public/
>
> - Licensing: the terms under which the implementation can be used. For
> example: proprietary, royalty licensing, freely distributable with
> acknowledgement (BSD style), freely distributable with requirement to
> redistribute source (General Public License (GPL) style), and other
> (specify).
> MIT license. Source code is available on GitHub at
> https://github.com/deiu/rww.io
>
> - Implementation experience: any useful information the implementers want
> to share with the community.
> Implementing current LDP features in RWW.I/O was trivial. I've also
> decided to add the Accept-Post header to HEAD replies, as it helps to
> reduce the number of requests for a client trying to discover more
> information about the server.
>

This is good to see.  I assume this then means it is available on GET
response too.  Do you supply this on a POST response, especially when it is
unsupported media type (415)?

I tested this but I received a 406 instead of 415 (and I didn't get the
Accept-Post header but would be good to get it in this case).  Which makes
me think which is the right choice.  Now that we have an accept type
header, one could see that 406 might be the right status code
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.4.7

$curl -v -X POST -H "Content-type: text/steve" https://deiu.rww.io/public/

- Steve Speicher


>
> Best,
> Andrei
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:22 PM, Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com> wrote:
>
>> thanks a lot, steve! cheers, dret.
>>
>> On Sep 3, 2013, at 12:36, "Steve Speicher" <sspeiche@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Erik,
>>
>> Here is the information about the implementation I have done and for
>> inclusion in
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-accept-post-00#section-6
>>
>> - The organization responsible for the implementation, if any.
>> IBM developed and contributed to the Eclipse Lyo project, see
>> http://eclipse.org/lyo
>>
>> - The implementation's name and/or a link to a web page describing the
>> implementation.
>> Eclipse Lyo "LDP reference implementation"
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Lyo/BuildLDPSample
>>
>> - A brief general description.
>> A very simple reference implementation for W3C Linked Data Platform (LDP)
>> using some base Java technologies such as JAX-RS 2.0 and Apache Jena.   The
>> goals of this reference implementation is to experiment with validating the
>> concepts in the specification and understanding what a SDK might look like
>> to build LDP-compliant servers. Additional goal is to validate the approach
>> for usage in OSLC4J SDK for building OSLC (http://open-services.net)
>> clients and servers.
>>
>> - The implementation's level of maturity: research, prototype, alpha,
>> beta, production, widely used, etc.
>> Early prototype/alpha.
>>
>> - Coverage: which parts of the protocol specification are implemented and
>> which versions of the Internet-Draft were implemented.
>> All were covered for server requirements.
>>
>> - Licensing: the terms under which the implementation can be used. For
>> example: proprietary, royalty licensing, freely distributable with
>> acknowledgement (BSD style), freely distributable with requirement to
>> redistribute source (General Public License (GPL) style), and other
>> (specify).
>> freely distributable (EPL and EDL)
>> The Eclipse Public License (EPL) is available at
>> http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html and the Eclipse Distribution
>> License (EDL) is available at
>> http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.php.
>>
>> - Implementation experience: any useful information the implementers want
>> to share with the community.
>> Experience is only from the server perspective of generating the HTTP
>> response header.  It was very trivial using JAX-RS 2.0 mechanism using a
>> ContainerResponseFilter on all responses.  There are more details about
>> this approach at
>> http://stevespeicher.blogspot.com/2013/08/supporting-accept-post-in-jax-rs.html
>>
>> Let me know if there is anything else you'd need.  I expect to have a few
>> more mature implementations using this shortly as well.
>>
>> - Steve Speicher
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> hello.
>>>
>>> the Accept-Post proposal now has been submitted as a draft
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-accept-post-00 , and it has been
>>> announced on the apps-discuss list
>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg10109.html.
>>>
>>> our goal now is to push this along as fast as we can. IETF processes are
>>> mostly driven by community feedback, so any support for this draft voiced
>>> on apps-discuss will help. also,
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-accept-post-00#section-6 is
>>> empty,
>>> and it would be great to add implementations to it. please take a look at
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6982#section-2 and submit your
>>> implementation information, if you have implemented Accept-Post. either
>>> send it to me directly, or if you feel like it, fork
>>> https://github.com/dret/I-D/tree/master/accept-post and submit your info
>>> as a pull request through github.
>>>
>>> thanks a lot and cheers,
>>>
>>> dret.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>