- From: Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 08:41:38 -0500
- To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Per our discussion on today's call I invite everyone to help develop the > list of questions that defines the scope of the new WG we would propose to > charter. We could change the format if we want to but that's secondary. Here > is the updated list based on today's discussion: > > 1. How can retrieval of a container and its contained resources be > combined so that fewer HTTP operations are required than it is necessary > with LDP 1.0? +1 > 2. How can multiple resources be created with a single HTTP request? +1 Perhaps though we could generalize this to "How can multiple operations be performed in a single request?" or "How can we optimize multiple operations, such as create?" > 3. How can a client request filtering what part of a resource or > container the server is to return? +0.1 Valuable but less of a priority > 4. How can a client be notified when something, such as a resource or > set of resources, changes? +1 Assuming we are loose in our definition of "notified" at this point. This doesn't assume they are pushed a notification or they have to pull to receive the notification, right? > 5. How can a client find out whether a service endpoint, such as a > SPARQL endpoint, is associated with a resource or set of resources? +1 > 6. How can access to a resource be controlled? +0 Though we access control all our resources, we really haven't had the need to expose this as API to general clients, and therefore not a need to standardize it. > 7. How can a client have greater control of how paging is done (size, > sorting, etc.)?" +0 > 8. How can a client learn what property constraints there are when > creating or updating a resource?" +1 > 9. How can we do efficient transfer of LDP resources, either some > initial set or rolling updates (feed) of changes? +1 Probably should amend this to say also, a way for the "cloned" set of resources to be access controlled by the origin server. > > Please, propose changes and additions as you see fit, as well as deletions > if you think that's appropriate. Thanks, Steve Speicher http://stevespeicher.me
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2014 13:42:05 UTC