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

Re: Client initiated vs Service initiated paging

From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:45:56 -0400
To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Steve K Speicher <sspeiche@us.ibm.com>, "ashok malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF000FD5CA.9A125BCF-ON85257BEF.00563E8E-85257BEF.00569B35@us.ibm.com>
I just fixed it in a private editor's copy.
I had held off because I realized the required changes were larger than 
just this case, and I needed to pick a time when I could do the 
appropriate search.
The update I made for the case raised is just to drop 'client-initiated', 
and the other hit is to scrub 'server-initiated' (which we only used once, 
as an in-line definition, so I just struck that sentence too).  The 
*function* is still completely available... once the client sees that 
first link, it can "initiate" paging by following it.
We could continue to define both terms, but as they were already used but 
once each, they were not adding much of anything.

Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario

From:   Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM
To:     Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, John 
Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS, "ashok malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, 

Cc:     "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Date:   09/20/2013 09:25 PM
Subject:        Re: Client initiated vs Service initiated paging

I haven't seen any response from the editors and from what I can tell the 
first comment hasn't been taken care of. I think Nandana is right though, 
isn't he?
Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group

From:   Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <nmihindu@fi.upm.es>
To:     "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, 
Date:   09/10/2013 07:16 PM
Subject:        Client initiated vs Service initiated paging


As the LDP spec stands now all the paging will be server initiated i.e. a 
client doesn't have a say whether a resource will be paged or not, isn't 
it ? So may be the term client-initiated paging could be a bit 

[[ LDPR servers must indicate their support for client-initiated 
paging by responding to a HTTP OPTIONS request on the LDPR’s URL with the 
HTTP response header for link relations using the header name of Link and 
link relation type first [RFC5988].

Also in the following section, something seems to be missing when the spec 
says 'See for additional details.'.

[[ LDPR servers may split the response representation of any LDPR. 
This is known as server-initiated paging. See for additional details.

Best regards,

Received on Monday, 23 September 2013 16:05:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:17:44 UTC