- From: Jan Algermissen <jalgermissen@topicmapping.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 19:39:25 +0200
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: public-web-http-desc@w3.org
Mark: > Jan: >> I just realized that I would actually need some way of >> specifying accepted >> RDF graphs (e.g. via patterns[1]) to use RDF forms for what I have in >> mind. What are >> your feelings about such an addition? >> > > I don't see the need. But if you wanted to sketch out an example > to prove me wrong, feel free. > My use case is that I want the resource to be able to say (by way of a form) exactly what state change it accepts. This information can be used to generate an HTML form for example. If I know the resource accepts changing its foo:status to any of 'open','stalled','resolved' I can produce nice selects from this. If I only know that the resource accepts application/rdf+xml then I am pretty much lost. Since I also would want to use RDF forms to express the state machine as a whole at configuration time (or maybe call it declarative programming if you want) I would need the information what state changes are possible from what states. But maybe we are talking past each other, dunno. > FWIW, I think this is actually an issue generic to forms language at > large, not RDF Forms specifically, so I think it's worth discussing > here. > > (*) cast using duck typing Good one :o) Jan > Mark. > > ________________________________________________________________________ ____________________ Jan Algermissen, Consultant & Programmer http://jalgermissen.com Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise IT' http://www.tugboat.de
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2005 17:39:32 UTC