Re: Clarifying POST behavior for LDPCs.

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Ashok Malhotra
<ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>wrote:

>  Right!
> 6.4.5 says that an LDPC can create an LDPC by using a Link header in the
> create request
> that specifies a LDPC.  However, the link to 6.2.8 is not useful.  So,
> some clarification
> is needed.
>
> There are also the related questions of "how do you create top-level
> LDPCs" i.e. how do
> you get started and how do you find all the top-level LDPCs contained in a
> server.
> Seems like we need a "mother of all containers" concept.
> All the best, Ashok
>

Indeed. Moreover, as an implementer, I would also like to be able to define
the prefix for all resources created when POST-ing to an LDPC. This is
especially useful when clients have to create LDPCs that would in turn
create LDPRs. The way it currently works in RWW.IO is that all new LDPRs
have the "resource_" prefix, while new LDPCs have the "dir_" prefix. Since
this is far from a preferred solution, I would like to add an extra triple
to the parent LDPC, like in this minimal example of a bug tracker:

<> a ldp:Container ;
    dcterms:title "Bug tracker for project XYZ" ;
    ldp:contains <bug_1>, <bug_2> ;
    ldp:LDPRprefix "bug_" .

I doubt this will make it into LDP 1.0, but it is something that is worth
investigating, since the spec doesn't mention any naming conventions when
creating new LDP(C,R)s.

Best,
Andrei

P.S. Apologies if this has already been discussed and I missed it.



>
>  On 2/12/2014 5:18 PM, Andrei Sambra wrote:
>
> Hi Ashok,
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
> > wrote:
>
>>  Hi Andrei:
>> Take a look at section 6.4.5 and see if that answers your question.
>> All the best, Ashok
>>
>
>  The links in section 6.4.5 point to section 6.2 which is about LDPC GET.
> Moreover, section 6.2 specifies that Link headers with rel=type are used in
> the HTTP response. The bottom line is that there is no mention of those
> headers being used during an HTTP request. I hope I've been clearer this
> time.
>
>  -- Andrei
>
>
>>
>>   On 2/12/2014 1:18 PM, Andrei Sambra wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>  I'm getting really close to having a working implementation on RWW.IO[1]. However, I found that the spec section that describes POST behavior
>> for LDPCs lacks some details. More precisely, how should an LDP client
>> create containers within a container (details below).
>>
>>  From section 6.4.5., we see that LDP servers that successfully create a
>> resource from a RDF representation in the request entity body must honor
>> the client's requested interaction model(s). More precisely, if the request
>> header specifies an LDPC interaction model, then the server must create an
>> LDPC.
>>
>>  The link to the interaction model points to section 6.2.8, which deals
>> with GET requests -- exposing the Link header with rel=type. At this point,
>> one can only assume that the same Link header must be present during a
>> POST, since there is no mention in the spec about it.
>>
>>  My suggestion would be to either add an example in section 6.4., or
>> explicitly mention that LDPRs and LDPCs can be created based on the Link
>> href value present in the POST request headers (either ldp:Resource or
>> ldp:Container).
>>
>>  Best,
>> Andrei
>>
>>  [1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/LDP_Implementations#RWW.IO
>>
>>
>>
>
>