- From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:46:56 -0400
- To: public-rww@w3.org
On 4/11/17 5:47 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 4/11/17 4:40 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: >> >> On 4/11/17 4:32 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >>> On 4/11/17 1:39 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: >>>> One would not, for example, mount an RDF file system. (One might >>>> browse a distributed collection of Linked Data using a browser with a >>>> semantic data plug-in installed.) >>> Hi Miles, >>> >>> You could mount an LDP Container (a/k/a Folder) via an LDP compliant >>> app. Net effect, richer metadata for file/document browsing. >>> >>> Example: >>> >>> curl -ikLH "Origin: http://example.com" -H "Accept: text/turtle" >>> https://id.myopenlink.net/DAV/home/KingsleyUyiIdehen/RWW/ >>> >>> Due to broad OS support of WebDAV (which isn't the case for LDP, right >>> now) we combine the use both in our RWW solutions. >>> >>> >> Well yes, but that's not the intent of LDP or it's standard use. More >> fundamentally - it's NOT a replacement for WebDAV, nor was it intended >> as one. >> > Hi Miles, > > Nothing in this response, or the one's I made earlier [1], imply that I > see LDP as a replacement for WebDAV. My initial response clearly > indicated that I see LDP as an alternative protocol (not replace) for > RWW operations :) > > [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2017Apr/0003.html -- > My initial response. > I think I must have missed your original response. My post was motivated by not seeing a clear statement that responded directly to the original question. Yours clearly is such a response. Miles -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
Received on Wednesday, 12 April 2017 03:47:25 UTC