W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-19: Adressing more error cases, as is

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 19:55:39 +0200
Cc: Mark Baker <mark@zepheira.com>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "public-ldp@w3.org" <public-ldp@w3.org>
Message-Id: <6D3AD449-C410-418F-81E7-479AB5475ED1@bblfish.net>
To: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>

On 4 Jun 2013, at 19:42, Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org> wrote:

> On 06/04/2013 01:10 PM, Mark Baker wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
>>> The HTTP response code tells the client that this is an error code and not the representation.
>> 
>> This.
>> 
>> Erik, I wish you'd stop invoking the "REST community", when AFAIK,
>> you, Henry and I are the only ones to have ever given serious,
>> brain-cramping thought to the relationship of media types to RDF, and
>> we have you beat 2 to 1 :)
> 
> RDF was not designed with HTTP interactions in mind.

I doubt this. The Open World assumption, URIs for names of relations, 
Tim Berners Lee who organised and orchestrated the development of it, 
who as far as I know is pretty familiar with HTTP,... all this
goes to tell me that RDF Was designed very much with HTTP in mind.
That not everybody understood the full picture is another matter.

> If I see
> "Content-type: text/turtle", I know that I should look at [1] to know
> about the interactions it allows, but this one does not say anything
> about LDP. At best, I know about the ontology but nothing more.

[1] is not about interactions. [1] tells you how to parse the result and
how to interpret it. That is what mime types do, they allow you to select
among the possible grammers, the ones that you need to interpret the stream
of bytes on the wire.

> 
> To be honest, I've never been sure how LDP was solving this issue. I'd
> be happy to know the general answer.

So by now, I no longer no what issue you are talking about.

I can guess. If you get a 401 and you have a well known ontology of
error descriptions, and the error description says something like

HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden
Content-Type: text/turtle
Content-Language: en

@prefix : <http://problems.example/#> 
...

<> :hasproblem   [ a <http://example.com/probs/out-of-credit>;
        dc:title "You do not have enough credit.";
        atom:summary "Your current balance is 30, but that costs 50.";
        :problemInstance  <http://example.net/account/12345/msgs/abc>;
        :balance [ currency:dollars 30 ],
        :accounts  ( <http://example.net/account/12345>,
                     <http://example.net/account/67890> ) .
   
What else do you need? The 403 tells you that your transaction was forbidden, and so the
content can only be an explanation of the problem, not a description of the resource.

Henry


> 
> Alexandre.
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/
> 
>> 
>> Mark.
>> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 17:56:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:16:35 UTC