Re: Conditional delete in LDP

Hi John,

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:38 PM, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> PUT/PATCH/some-POSTs  would pretty obviously make sense, since that's
> where you get competing updates ... and that's where a lost update is
> *observable*.  It's not trivial to describe what subset of POSTs need to be
> in scope, but that might just be a good opportunity to wave our hands a bit
> and keep it at the "update" intent level.


 I agree.

> DELETE is less obvious.  A competing update and delete can run in either
> order, and after both are done the results are the same so the difference
> is not observable.
>

I think the DELETE would be only mainly important if in cases where I would
decide not to delete based on the state of the resource. Something like, I
want to delete all the resource where I see, <> ex:priority "low". I
retrive one such resource but before I delete someone changes it to contain
<> ex:priority "high". If I could only notice that if I do a conditional
delete.

Best Regards,
Nandana