Re: ACTION-43 Draft use case for ordering

hello richard.

On 2013-03-25 11:32 , "Richard Cyganiak" <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:
>I think that using an rdf:List to express the order of items, rather than
>through the property used for ordering, could be simpler on clients.
>
>For example, if we have three events
>
>  :event_2012-12-01
>  :event_2013-01-14
>  :event_2013-03-04
>
>that are ordered by date in a container response, I think it would be
>better to say (note that this is Turtle shorthand syntax for creating an
>rdf:List):
>
>  <container> ldp:order (:event_2012-12-01 :event_2013-01-14
>:event_2013-03-04).
>
>And we shouldn't say:
>
>  <container> ldp:orderProperty dc:date.
>
>If we specify the order explicitly by a list property, then client and
>server need to agree on the sort semantics for that property. This is a
>(slight) burden for the standard literal datatypes, but becomes rather
>difficult when custom datatypes are used.

i think this makes a lot of sense. we cannot rely on client-side ordering,
because ordering is not necessarily based on anything *in* the response. a
service could very well support ordering based on information that is not
exposed in the response. but the interesting question still remains: how
do we expose these capabilities, so that clients can actually send a
request that will result in the response as shown by richard?

cheers,

dret.

Received on Monday, 25 March 2013 22:55:02 UTC