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

Re: Obscure section and concept of "interaction model"

From: Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 14:14:14 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOUJ7JryMcS5WNmnyWrxTFhLfY3ed_6gwFwvFprWV8QNeCMxZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Reto Gmür <reto@apache.org>
Cc: "public-ldp@w3.org" <public-ldp@w3.org>
Hi Reto,

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Reto Gmür <reto@apache.org> wrote:

> Hello,
> Section specifies that server “MUST honor the client’s requested
> interaction model(s)”. Sections and are linked for the two
> mentioned interaction models. These two sections specify a response header
> that the server should send in reponse to indicate that a resource is an
> LDPR respectively an LDPC.
> What confuses me is:
>    -
>    I don’t find a proper definition of “interaction model”. Apart from
>    section it is only mentioned once in the introduction.
> This was a widely used term ("interaction model") in the WG when
discussing the feature.  Some proposals to clarify the meaning...

1. Replace "interaction models" with "semantics"

>    -
>    -
>    In a normative section about requests I’m pointed to a section
>    defining response headers
2. Replace "client's requested interaction model (s). If any requested
interaction model cannot be honored," with
"client's requested LDP semantics.  If any requested LDP semantics cannot
be honored,"

3. Replace "If the request header specifies a LDPR interaction model
"If the client request LDPR semantics (by setting request header Link: <
http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Resource>; rel="type"),  ".
Append  "See for additional details on the Link: rel='type' header"

4. similar to #3 above for bullet on LDPC

5. replace last occurrence of "interaction model" with "semantic"

>    - LDPC is a subtype of LDPR (see Fig. 3). So for an LDPR it shouldn’t
>    be wrong to specify the LDPR “interaction model”. However the sentence
>    “request header specifies a LDPR interaction model
>    <http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/#ldpr-gen-linktypehdr>, then the server MUST
>    handle subsequent requests to the newly created resource’s URI as if it is
>    a LDPR. (even if the content contains an rdf:type triple indicating a type
>    of LDPC).” sound as if LDPC and LDPR are disjoint classes.
> According to the client specified "interaction model" (aka semantic), if
the client specified LDPR then the resource is not a LDPC.  It just happens
to be a LDPR, which has a triple of <s, rdf:type, ldp:Container>.

Let us know if this helps with the clarity on this and then I can fold in
the changes.

- Steve

> Cheers,
> Reto
> ​
Received on Friday, 26 September 2014 18:14:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:16:38 UTC