Re: who wants lossy paging?

On 02/17/2014 07:51 AM, John Arwe wrote:
> > Does someone have a system, in use or planned, which uses paging and
> > doesn't care that it's lossy as per the spec?
>
> Yes - several (at least one GA as a component in 2 products, and 
> several WIP).  They're not using LDP-paging syntax (since this is GA 
> products and they won't build on an unstable spec), but they're using 
> a very close analog that is explicitly lossy in the LDP sense.

Maybe you can sketch an example that will help me understand how it is 
that people don't care about silently getting the wrong results?

> BTW, LDP goes not *guarantee* lossy-ness.  I wouldn't say we don't 
> care - it's annoying as heck on the client side.
>

Right.    It doesn't matter if we care, though. Annoying your clients 
while saying "sorry" is still annoying your clients.

>  But this is a distributed system, and I've yet to see an 
> implementation that can both scale and provide stable paging.
>

This could be a very interesting discussion.  :-)

> Some clients (notably UIs) want (a lot) more features from paging than 
> we've even discussed.  Often they think they want stability at first, 
> then once they see the cost they back off and live with unstable.
>

I imagine UIs mostly would want sorting, and maybe filtering.       
Sorting can be done with PREFER, I think.   For filtering I'd probably 
switch to SPARQL.

      -- Sandro

> Best Regards, John
>
> Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages 
> <http://w3.ibm.com/jct03019wt/bluepages/simpleSearch.wss?searchBy=Internet+address&location=All+locations&searchFor=johnarwe> 
>
> Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
>