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

Re: Multiple resource representations during LDPC POST (5.4.1)

From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 10:14:15 -0500
To: "public-ldp@w3.org" <public-ldp@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF3A09BECC.3DA504EE-ON85257C5F.0052111C-85257C5F.0053B471@us.ibm.com>
> as input -- but why call it "representation" as 5.4.1 does, and not
> "graph"?

Because 5.4.1 applies to creation of all types of members, not only of 
members representable as RDF.
It's an HTTP interaction, and HTTP transfers representations (generally).

> I'm arguing that one cannot PUT or POST a resource representation (in
> full). One can only GET it, possibly as product of multiple graphs, as
> with the DESCRIBE result.

At the HTTP level, your PUT argument sounds equivalent to saying PUT 
cannot be implemented, which conflicts with implementation experience. 
You MIGHT be in similar trouble with POST, I have not checked 2616's 
wording today but generally it talks about POST accepting processing 
instructions (create is one example of that usage, but not the only one).

If you are talking about some restricted subset of all Web resources, 
"maybe" [he says, without checking ;-) ].  But as soon as I wrote "Web", I 
started to feel like it will be a definitional issue.

> I think "description of resource" from SPARQL is actually the true
> meaning of LDP "resource representation", and defined better:

That might be true if LDP 5.4.1 ONLY dealt with graphs, but that's not the 
case.  Search on "binary" for other points in the text where this comes 
out more clearly.



Best Regards, John

Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages
Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
Received on Monday, 13 January 2014 15:14:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:03:11 UTC