- From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 13:48:49 -0700
- To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF3F2A2006.302F11FB-ON88257BEF.0070BFCA-88257BEF.0072559A@us.ibm.com>
Thanks Eric for completing your action. I note that the URL you suggest we use to type the resource as a page is inconsistent with what we currently have for LDP Resources: http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Page vs http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp/Resource I don't personally have a strong opinion as to which style is better but I would argue we need to have consistency. By the way, are Page resources LDPRs? When retrieving a page do I get both type headers? -- Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <ericw3c@gmail.com> wrote on 09/21/2013 06:40:57 PM: > From: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org> > To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org, > Date: 09/21/2013 06:42 PM > Subject: claimed completion of ACTION-97 - proposal for pure-HTTP paging > Sent by: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <ericw3c@gmail.com> > > Find the <PROPOSAL/> 44 lines down. > > TimBL's comment LC-2836 proposed moving page control out of the body > of an LDPR and into headers. > <https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/55082/ldp/2836?cid=2836> > > This buys us: > • Potential reuse outside of LDPRs. > • Unrestricted data in an LDPR (screw case: an LDPR which includes a > page from another LDPR). > > The first example in the LDP LC decribes how a GET on <resourceURL> > 303's (now 208½'s?) to e.g. <resourceURL>?firstPage, or OPTIONS on > <resourceURL> yields: > Link: <resourceURL>?firstPage; rel="first" > The content of <resourceURL>?firstPage includes client data plus this > paging data: > > [[ > <http://example.org/customer-relations?firstPage> > a ldp:Page; > ldp:pageOf <http://example.org/customer-relations>; > ldp:nextPage <http://example.org/customer-relations?p=2>. > ]] <http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/#ldpr-PagingIntro> (can we have an anchor > on the <div class="example"/> elements?) > > The paging in this example is a singly-linked list split across HTTP > and the payload. We can move it all into HTTP (for the reasons above) > using link types defined in RFC5988 Web Linking: > > first - An IRI that refers to the furthest preceding resource in a > series of resources. > last - An IRI that refers to the furthest following resource in a > series of resources. > previous - Refers to the previous resource in an ordered series of > resources > next - Refers to the next resource in a ordered series of resources. > > The type arc can come from RFC6903 Additional Link Relation Types: > type - Refers to a resource identifying the abstract semantic > type of which the link's context is considered to be an > instance. > > > <PROPOSAL> > • GETs and OPTIONS on <resourceURL> remain the same. > > • GET/HEAD on <resourceURL>?firstPage returns purely user content with: > Link: http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Page; rel=type > Link: <resourceURL>?page2; rel=next > > • Lack of a Link: rel=next means you're at the end (closed HTTP world). > > • GET/OPTIONS on "doubly-linked servers" return an addtional last linl: > Link: <resourceURL>?page2; rel="last" > > • GET/HEAD on <resourceURL>?page2 on "doubly-linked servers" includes > Link: <resourceURL>?firstPage; rel=previous > </PROPOSAL> > > > I prefer these link types to others in the IANA registry: > <http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml> > > RFC6903 Additional Link Relation Types: > about - Refers to a resource that is the subject of the link's context. > > RFC6573 The Item and Collection Link Relations: > collection - The target IRI points to a resource which represents the > collection resource for the context IRI. > item - The target IRI points to a resource that is a member of > the collection represented by the context IRI. > > POWDER: > describedBy > RFC6892 The 'describes' Link Relation Type: > describes > > RFC6906 The 'profile' Link Relation Type: > profile - Identifying that a resource representation conforms to > a certain profile, without affecting the non-profile > semantics of the resource representation. > -- > -ericP >
Received on Monday, 23 September 2013 20:49:32 UTC