- From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:16:20 -0600
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: rww@mit.edu, Read-Write-Web <public-rww@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACvcBVqLEBKu9CHyTpfMiMTWzQrrntABzX-O-2vra1eBoGbt7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Why is it called the Linked Data Platform? On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>wrote: > On 15 Jan 2014, at 19:45, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have updated the WAC wiki page wiht an LDP sepecific section. > > http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl#WAC_And_LDP > > One part of it looks at how HTTP verbs tie up with WAC. I did > not yet look at the Control section. But one thing that one does > wonder a bit is if these words should not align more closely with the > HTTP verbs, or how they should tie together. > > > Here is the relevant section of the wiki page with the table: > WAC relation to HTTP Verbs > In LDP an OPTIONS request MUST return a Allow header stating what HTTP > methods can be used on a resource. Those headers can be returned ( whether > they MUST be is an open question [1]<https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/93> > ) > Here is an initial mapping between the HTTP verbs used by LDP and the wac > ontology. > HTTP VERBSwac:Readwac:Writewac:Executewac:AppendGET√x ?xPUTx√ ?xPOSTx√ ? > √ ?DELETEx√ ?xPATCHx√ ?√ with INSERT only > It would be nice if the Allow header could give mostly the right hints to > the client about what he is allowed to do without needing to parse the acl > links, as parsing the ACL link and following the redirects could require > quite a number of hops (and may not be available to the client). This still > would leave a non-authenticated user with the task of having to follow > those links, if he wants to discover what rights authentication would bring. > Looking at the above table it is clear that wac:Read maps nicely to GET and > that wac:Write maps nicely to all the others methods, except READ. > But this still leaves the following two problems: > > - does wac:Append apply to POST, ie is POST an append operation? (It > feels like it.) > - a client that knows it has PATCH access might not yet know if can > only use INSERT, ie, only update or if it can also DELETE triples from > a graph. > > > > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > >
Received on Thursday, 16 January 2014 19:16:49 UTC