- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 07:45:56 -0700
- To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-socialweb@w3.org, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 14:46:23 UTC
The use of paging link headers is good. I've made use of that myself (see http://dandus.mybluemix.net/r/). The rest is quite a bit more complicated than I think we really need. The paging model in AS2 is no doubt imperfect, but it works well in practice. On Apr 28, 2015 7:22 AM, "Arnaud Le Hors" <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote: > "henry.story@bblfish.net" <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote on 04/24/2015 > 09:25:28 AM: > > > Btw. I think there are quite a few LDP paging implementations too. > > Quite a bit of work went into LDP Paging so it might be interesting to > look into it but that claim is bogus. The LDP Paging spec is stuck in CR > because we can't find the minimum two implementations required to exit CR. > > The problem seems to be two folds: 1) people are only interested in paging > as a mechanism to go through search/query results which we currently don't > have, 2) people want more control from the client, such as over the size of > the page and sort order, which the current draft doesn't provide. > > LDP Paging isn't dead because people want to keep working on it for > LDPnext but for now I wouldn't claim that this is a reference this WG ought > to align with. > -- > Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - > IBM Software Group > >
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 14:46:23 UTC