- From: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:59:29 -0400
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, foaf-protocols <foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org>
<snip> > rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl"; ... > Even if a WAC link relation value was registered, it'd have to state to > expect some form of RDF ACF in response else problems would arise, hence > creation of the aforementioned^^ :) </snip> the registry exists to allow authors to make whatever claims they wish about the nature of the response for the registered link relation value. using a 40+ byte URI instead of a 3 byte string makes no difference on the expectations of the caller or the behavior of the responder. but it makes a hell of a difference on the overall bandwidth and network traffic. mca http://amundsen.com/blog/ http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 17:53, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote: > Yup, that's what this is for > > Link: </.wac/everyone.n3>; > rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl"; > title="Access Control File" > > as per > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-10#section-4.2 > > 'Applications that don't wish to register a relation type can use an > extension relation type, which is a URI' > > Even if a WAC link relation value was registered, it'd have to state to > expect some form of RDF ACF in response else problems would arise, hence > creation of the aforementioned^^ :) > > Best, > > Nathan > > mike amundsen wrote: >> >> rel=meta is insufficient. >> >> rel=http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl is better. >> >> better still would be a registered link relation value [1] (e.g. "WAC"). >> >> [1] >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-10#section-6.2 >> >> mca >> http://amundsen.com/blog/ >> http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 17:41, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote: >>> >>> ACL Ontology has been updated, thus we now have: >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl >>> 'The Access Control file for this information resource. >>> This may of course be a virtual resource implemented by the access >>> control system. Note also HTTP's header Link: foo.meta ;rel=meta >>> can be used for this.' >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Nathan >>> >>> Nathan wrote: >>>> >>>> Story Henry wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 20 Apr 2010, at 08:47, Michael Hausenblas wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Nathan, >>>>>> >>>>>> That sort of reminds me of something [1] ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> So, I asked a round a bit [2] and the answer essentially was: go >>>>>> register >>>>>> one ... fancy doing it together? >>>>> >>>>> The latest document draft-nottingham is here btw >>>>> >>>>> http://cidr-report.org/ietf/idref/draft-nottingham-http-link-header/ >>>>> >>>>> One could just register it by adding the relation in the acl ontology >>>>> such as >>>>> >>>>> acl:rules a rdf:Property; >>>>> rdf:domain foaf:Document; >>>>> rdf:range foaf:Document; >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> As you can see in the 5.5 examples, you can have a rel value as a URL. >>>>> ( So in this it is similar to >>>>> atom). The only disadvantage then is that you don't get the nice >>>>> shorthand, for inclusion in Atom XML, >>>>> and other documents. >>>> >>>> Yup that's what I went for too :) >>>> >>>> Link: </.wac/everyone.n3>; rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#"; >>>> title="Access Control File" >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> foaf-protocols mailing list >>> foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org >>> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols >>> >> >> > >
Received on Friday, 18 June 2010 22:00:03 UTC