W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI

From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 23:28:20 +0200
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-id: <200910112328.21194.kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
On Sunday 11. October 2009 21:59:53 Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> Good questions to bring out assumptions ...
> > 1) The HTTP Update protocol is required to be RESTful. (+1, yes; 0,
> > preferred, but not required; -1, it could be anything)
> REST is a style (abstract architecture) with principles.  It's not
> really something that you can always say "yes" or "no" to in every case
> - some things are clearly not RESTful, some things clearly are, lot of a
> lot of things are grey and it depends on who you ask.

Then we should ask Roy, as he short of owns the definition... :-) 

> I don't see how we can "require" it.  Rather, take the principles and
> makes a concrete design that addresses the usage we want to cover.

OK, I can respect that opinion. What I want to know, given the buzz around 
REST, is just if it is a desirable goal, and I would like to decide it as 
quickly as possible, with a straw-poll, not much discussion is needed.

> > 2) The protocol must specify how to use POST, PUT, GET and DELETE on a
> > URI identifying information resource graph. (+1, yes, required; 0,
> > optional; -1, WG shouldn't spend time on it)
> I believe that the update protocol is simply using the correct meaning
> of the verbs PUT, GET and DELETE as defined by RFC 2616 in the context
> of RDF graphs held in a graph store/update service [*].

Yep, since REST and RFC 2616 was developed hand-in-hand as far as I 
understand, they will be well aligned.

> In the case of POST, which is too broad to defined enough to fix the
> meaning here, and we apply a specific meaning to the verb but it is
> completely inline with the definition in RFC 2616.


> I'd rather say "will show" than say "must specify".
> > 3) The protocol must specify how to use manipulate a graph with a
> > proxy graph identifier. (+1, yes, required; 0, optional; -1, WG
> > shouldn't spend time on it)
> I don't like the term proxy because:

Neither do I.

> A/ (minor) "proxies" in HTTP occur in a lot of places so it's a bit
> overloaded
> B/ Having two names for the same thing is just something that happens on
> the web. Both names have the same status.

So, it means it is a URI Alias. While that carries some negative 
connotation, perhaps we should just use that term "endpoint URI alias", or 


Kjetil Kjernsmo
Received on Sunday, 11 October 2009 21:28:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:57 UTC