Fw: Comments on LDP-Paging - the remainder

Getting this on-list.

wrt when an in-sequence page would be removed, simple example is that data 
is deleted from the paged resource (>=1 entire page's worth), after the 
traversal has passed that page.  If the client "comes back again", and 
especially if it cached/is using the page links from its original 
traversal, it can observe a smaller set of pages.  It's just the symmetric 
case versus the "added data => larger and/or new pages" case we've focused 
on.

wrt the 404 question, BP has NOT yet been published so it's TR-space URL 
still 404s, as of yesterday.  I begin to wonder if we should just point to 
a list hung off the WG wiki page (or that page itself) and get of South 
Park shop class.

wrt Preference-Applied, your inserted contexts match my intent


Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Cloud and Smarter Infrastructure OSLC Lead

----- Forwarded by John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM on 07/31/2014 09:05 AM -----

From:   Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com>
To:     John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS
Date:   07/30/2014 04:31 PM
Subject:        Re: Comments on LDP-Paging - the remainder



> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:41 PM, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > <#terms-from-paging>
> > "Paged resource"
> > "In-sequence page resource"
> > "In-sequence page resource", "fist page link", "last page link"
> All these should be addressed now; SS, see if you agree.
> changeset [2] / editor's draft [3]  
>
+1

> > <#ldpr-pagingGET-sequences-change>
> Should have been addressed via "the Sandro-motivated changes"... 
changeset [4] / editor's draft [3]
+1

Though I still have a hard time understanding when an in-sequence page 
would be removed and the sequence would be maintained, I would think 
server impl would would initiate a new sequence.

> > <#ldpp-client-paging-incomplete>
> Another thread handling this [5]
(responded there)

> > <#MISSING?>
> (two of those in [1]) Another thread handling this [6]
(responded there)

> > <#intro>
> Being unwilling to add a 404 link in an LC draft, carrying as TODO in 
HTML comment at top of file.
I wasn't suggesting pointing to non-existent docs, both these documents 
exist.  I guess if there were separate documents for paging that were on 
our todo list, then yes, they'd be 404s.

> > <#ldpp-ex-paging-303>
> yes
(added in missing context/question)
>> Examples 6, 8, 10, 12: Is this missing?
>> Preference-Applied: return=representation
implying "no"

>> I see in 6.2.4 says it can be omitted if client can determine from 
other 
>> values, so I assume that is why it is not there?
implying "yes"

+1

> > <#ldpr-impl>
> No objection from me; asked those authors offline IIRC, no response yet.

Ok

Thanks,
Steve

> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Jul/0059.html
> [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/rev/34d96d2d6359
> [3] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp-paging.html
> [4] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/rev/76e5cbeb6b36
> [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Jul/0136.html
> [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Jul/0138.html
> Best Regards, John
> Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
> Cloud and Smarter Infrastructure OSLC Lead
>
> From original [1]