W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > March 2014

Re: Action-136 what we need to add to the spec for context uri in the link header on put and post

From: <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:57:54 +0100
Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <5EFFAD85-AE7C-4BFE-8127-75182E4DAE1B@bblfish.net>
To: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>

On 28 Mar 2014, at 14:28, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> 5.2.3.4 needs to define the context uri as the to-be-created resource, since RFC 5988 only defines the default context uri for responses to retrieval requests.   
> 
> We have a choice about how to do that; 
> 1: simply specify that the *default* context URI is the to-be-created resource's URI 
> 2: define a specific syntax (presumably "<>" aka the null relative URI) as specifying the to-be-created resource's URI 
> Option 1 is better insofar as clients get the desired behavior by default; option 2 requires them to explicitly add the request header.  I propose option 1. 
> 
> 5988 always allows the sender to override the default context URI by explicitly including anchor="context URI" on the Link header, so (on the error paths) there is no difference from the server's point of view.  On the normal path the server has code of similar (minimal) complexity under either option. 
> 
> The same issue exists with PUT; and arguably with OPTIONS and DELETE, depending upon whether or not one considers those to be "retrieval" requests.  But as the action was limited to put/post, and there's no LDP-assigned semantics on the others, no reason to flog them. 
> Best Regards, John

I think 2 is the way the anchor functions. ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988 )

   When present, the anchor parameter overrides this with another URI,
   such as a fragment of this resource, or a third resource (i.e., when
   the anchor value is an absolute URI).  If the anchor parameter's
   value is a relative URI, parsers MUST resolve it as per [RFC3986],
   Section 5.  Note that any base URI from the body's content is not
   applied.

That is if you gave it the empty URI <> then this would refer to the same
resource as the context URI. 

So I think we just need to do 1. and 2 will fall out correctly.


> 
> Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages 
> Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Friday, 28 March 2014 14:58:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:17:48 UTC