- From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 08:07:30 -0400
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFDA1580ED.559D4BD1-ON85257D4D.0041DEB5-85257D4D.00429BBF@us.ibm.com>
> recommendation, since it contradicts a resolution taken on April: > http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2014-04-15#resolution_4 Sergio, what's the nature of the conflict you see? When I re-read the resolution, I think the spec implements it. Or are you saying that there's a conflict baked into that resolution? > Sec. 5.2.3.12 and Sec. 4.2.6. 4.2.1.6 (sic, not 4.2.6, for anyone else checking references) governs "request failed because [describedby: link to constraints] were violated". 5.2.3.12 governs "server created a LDP-NR as requested [201] *and* btw it also created an associated LDP-RS [describedby: link to LDP-RS]" Since a single request cannot both succeed and fail, even if someone were to convince me that at most one describedby link is allowed on any resource (which would be an uphill climb), I'm not seeing a conflict here. Best Regards, John Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages Cloud and Smarter Infrastructure OSLC Lead
Received on Monday, 8 September 2014 12:08:08 UTC