Re: Action: various questions (container thread)

☮ elf Pavlik ☮ writes:

> Hi,
> I start work on compiling review of how, Activity Streams 2.0
> and Hydra model Activity/Action/Operation, Handler/EntryPoint. I
> aim to have it at useful stage before Wednesday session with Social WG
> at TPAC, preferably already on Tuesday. I'd like to gather all relevant
> questions on this thread to avoid creating noise on the list.
> My first question relates to reason for creating sub properties of
> Currently only one of them exists
> (domainIncludes: ReviewAction, rangeIncludes: Review). I don't
> understand the need for defining it instead of just using generic result.
> It looks to me possibly somehow related to hydra:expects and hydra:returns
> "While links are enough to build read-only Web APIs, more powerful
> affordances are required to build read-write Web APIs. Thus, Hydra
> introduces the notion of operations. Simply speaking, an Operation
> represents the information necessary for a client to construct valid
> HTTP requests in order to manipulate the server's resource state. As
> such, the only required property of an Operation is its HTTP method.
> Optionally, it is also possible to describe what information the server
> *expects* or *returns*, including additional information about HTTP
> status codes that might be returned."
> In
> Example: Movie review site API with -input and -output
> Current published version of that example uses ReviewAction as both -
> request and response. I would find it more intuitive to expect Review
> and return either Review or Error.
> request
> {
>   "@type": "Review",
>   "itemReviewed": "",
>   "reviewBody": "yada, yada, yada",
>   "reviewRating": {
>     "@type": "Rating",
>     "ratingValue": "4"
>   }
> }
> response: same Review just with @id or Error
> Cheers!

Heya elf Pavlik, sorry for the delay on replying to this.  I've seen
your name around quite a bit before the Social WG; it's been good to see
you very positive in the group.

I've cc'ed Jessica, who is doing the bulk of related coding in

Well... we have movie comments right now, but no review or even voting
systems yet.  I'd love to have that of course in MediaGoblin...

It's a bit embarassing, but I only have a rudimentary wrapping of my
head around how Hydra and other ideas around publishing actions in an
ActivityStreams 2.0 universe work.  That makes it kind of hard for me to
respond... Jessica and I have had some back and forth fluctuations on
debating how useful this stuff is.  I think neither of us has good
enough of an understanding to respond clearly right now though.

It seems to me (am I wrong?) that in some way following things similar
to the Pump API method of this could be very similar in "becoming" an
API for read/write access, though maybe I am wrong?

For example, if we wanted to post a review according to the Pump API
style, we could submit a Review object inReplyTo a movie object?  This
seems like a pretty generic setup... is there really any need to define
an API for everything?  Presently we're using the Pump API as also an
upload API, and it seems to be working nicely as such.. I wonder what
will happen when federation becomes available

I guess that's a pretty preliminary wonder at the moment.  Maybe it
would be easier to get a sense of what you're thinking in a discussion
on IRC?

Sorry that it's a very roundabout non-response!
 - Chris

Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2014 16:24:41 UTC