Names in Paging

<sandro> RESOLVED: replace "Single Page Resource" with "In-Sequence Page Resource", which is still loosely "page"

at Jun 30 2014 meeting.

With paging, we have a big resource which also appears as a sequence of smaller resources. The big one can be called a "paged resources", but what do we call one of the smaller ones? List ideas and opinions here.

1 a page

• sandro: -0.9 too ambiguous with web page
• arwe: -0.9 too ambiguous with web page
• SteveS: -0.9 too ambiguous

2 a single-page resource

This is what's in the current draft

• sandro: -0.7 too misleading, since non-paged resources are also single pages
• arwe: -0.2 conceptually, no such thing as non-paged resources (or, alternatively, all http resources are also single-page resources); syntactically though, if a resource has none of the so-called paging links (first/next/prev/last) then people might think of that as "non-paged".
• SteveS: +0 can live with it

3 a page resource

• sandro: -0.5 very vague
• arwe: -0.9 vague + "web page"-like again
• SteveS: +0 can live with it, as it is very simple

4 a fragment

• sandro: -0.9 Ambiguous with the idea of resource fragments being parts of a representation
• arwe: -0.9 Existing term of art in close to this space...part of URI syntax, that identify "subordinate" or "secondary" resources
• SteveS: -0.8 conflicts with other usage

5 a paging element

• sandro: -0.75 it should probably be a kind of resource
• arwe: -0.7 agree - "xyz resource" is the right pattern
• SteveS: -0.9 in set theory, a set contains elements...seems to collide with that definition

6 a subresource

• sandro: -0 this doesn't sound like it could still be a resource
• arwe: -0.5 sounds too much like 3986 "secondary" resources that fragments identify
• SteveS: -0 can live with it

7 a sequence resource

• sandro: +0.2 seems fairly clear once you know what it means
• arwe: -0.7 one page != the sequence; this would be a name for the "paged resource"
• SteveS: -0.8 doesn't flow well

8 an in-sequence resource

• sandro: +1 if you focus on the fact that it's linked via first/rest, this seems a very clear way to say it's one of those things. Still a bit long, though.
• arwe: +0.5 some risk of people reading in implications of some connection to ordering. OTOH a sequence is (some) ordering.
• SteveS: +0 can live with it

9 a partial resource

• sandro: -0 doesn't sound like it's own resource
• arwe: -0.5 ala sandro, + potential confusion with 3986 (fragment-identified) "secondary" resources
• SteveS: +0 can live with it

10 a traversal resource

• sandro: +0.2 shrug
• arwe: -0 any link I traverse gets me to a resource; implies I use this to get somewhere else (it's a means, rather than an end), which is true is some cases (consume the whole sequence) yet not in others (show first 10 results, then abandon traversal b/c user drilled down into one of the first 10).

 * SteveS: +0 can live with it

11 a subgraph page

• sandro: +0.75 doesn't include the idea that it's in sequence, and only works for LDP-RS's
• arwe: -0.2 implies that the paged resource is a sub-graph; which, in addition to the LDP-RS-only angle, tends to mislead in a different way (any sub-graph is also a graph). if we were going to re-scope to LDP-RS's only, I might say use "forest" and "tree"/"graph", but in isolation not much difference.
• SteveS: +0 can live with it

12 a segment resource / segment

• sandro: +1
• SteveS: +0.2 conflicts a bit with URI definition

13 a chapter resource / chapter

• sandro: +1
• SteveS: +0 can live with it, seems like we are talking about books

14 a subset resource

subset (and inclusion) definition - from set theory

• SteveS: +0.5 believe it accurately reuses these ideas/terms. A union of all subsets should have minimal intersection and contain all elements in the inclusion resource.
• Sandro: +0.6