Difference between revisions of "LDPNext"

From Linked Data Platform
Jump to: navigation, search
(Application APIs)
(A wish list for LDP.Next)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
In the scope of the current activity there is some potential extension work we we might want to consider.
 
In the scope of the current activity there is some potential extension work we we might want to consider.
 
Please extend the following list.  
 
Please extend the following list.  
 +
 +
 +
== How to PATCH ? ==
 +
 +
'''Related Issues'''
 +
* [http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/17 17] changesets as a recommended PATCH format
  
 
== Embedded representations ==
 
== Embedded representations ==

Revision as of 12:52, 19 June 2013

1 A wish list for LDP.Next

In the scope of the current activity there is some potential extension work we we might want to consider. Please extend the following list.


1.1 How to PATCH ?

Related Issues

  • 17 changesets as a recommended PATCH format

1.2 Embedded representations

When retreving a representation of a resource, a minimal expectation of the server is that it returns all the triples it where the addressed resource is found in the subject position (entity view). The server may also choose to inline other triples where the targeted resource is found in the object position. The baseline practice is that the client navigates to related resources to find out about them. However, to improve the efficiency of this interaction, it might be useful for client to instruct the server to provide inline representations of related resources. This requirement is similar to the functionity that OData provides with its 'expand' query option [1].

Related Issues

  • 38 Filtered Representations and Inlining
  • 58 Property for asserting that complete description of members is included in LDPC representation


1.3 Richer Containers

An ongoing (and persistent) discussion within LDP is that of containers. When a resource is considered to be contained inside another resource, there might be an expectation from a client that when the 'parent' resource is DELETEd, then the contained resources also get DELETEd. Furthermore, they might this behaviour to recursively apply. If this is not addressed in today's LDP, then LDP.next might want to provide the necessary extensions to define additional semantics around containers, including recursive deletion.

Related Issues

  • 25 Weak aggregation and strong composition in containers
  • 59 Reconsider usage of Aggregate/Composite construct to get predictable container delete behavior

1.4 Application APIs

It could be said that LDP currently facilitates CRUD style data manipulation. However ...

Related Issues

  • 26 Creation Model