- From: <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:03:41 +0200
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Cc: Arnaud LeHors <lehors@us.ibm.com>, public-socialweb@w3.org
- Message-Id: <3495C7CF-1537-4272-B042-A7CEBC7CB08E@bblfish.net>
> On 28 Apr 2015, at 16:45, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > > The use of paging link headers is good. I've made use of that myself (see http://dandus.mybluemix.net/r/ <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. > It may work for JS programmers that don't do RDF, but not correctly for RDF developers, whome it gives a lot of unecessary work. I suggest we look at the work of the LDP group for inspiration, and then find a way to crystalise that into a JSON friendly JSON-LD that makes it easy for JS developers ignorant of RDF to use. If you can prove that that is not possible then that would be something else of course. But I doubt it. I think if we are going to find a compromise it has to be that it works intelligently for both camps. Btw, note that the issues the LDP group with paging are not technical ones. There is just not enough interest in implementations at present. If they can't find the interest then that might also indicate btw. the same lack of real interest here... Henry > On Apr 28, 2015 7:22 AM, "Arnaud Le Hors" <lehors@us.ibm.com <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote: > "henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>" <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto: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 > Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 15:04:11 UTC