This wiki is locked. Future workgroup activity and specification development must take place at
our new wiki
. For more information, see
this blog post about the new governance model
and
this post about changes to the website
.
TWiki
>
Main Web
>
OslcCore
>
OslcCorePartialUpdate
>
OSLCCorePartialUpdateISSUES
(05 Apr 2012,
SteveSpeicher
)
(raw view)
---+++ Comments on Guidance - Partial Update 1 CLOSED Reconsider using SPARQL Update as the patch document and even if we don't choose this, consider providing SPARQL update equivalents for each OSLC Patch Document example. * *Response* using SPARQL update for now, if something better pops up we'll reopen 1 CLOSED partial update by command: what are the motivations? (IanGreen, 03/03/2010) * Proposed: I tried to explain the motivations up front * *Response* -Accepted- Closed by IanGreen 29-april-2010 1 CLOSED When [[OSLCCorePartialUpdateDRAFT#Adding_property_values_to_a_reso][adding a property]], it recommends using POST. Is it expected to respond with a URI in the Location: header? I would expect could be a URI that builds the right URL to GET the resource with properties. I'm not certain we need to say anything about Location header, just wanted to raise it. (SteveSpeicher, 03/31/2010) * *Response* We're not doing creation, so I don't think we need to mention the HTTP Location header (DaveJohnson 05/21/2010) 1 CLOSED I am concerned about this use of QNames in http headers. If we want to POST a command object, I think the body of the request should be XML/JSON/etc and should describe everything about the command. (IanGreen, 29-april-2010). * *Response*: this is no longer in the spec (DaveJohnson 05/21/2010) 1 CLOSED Addressing the triple by suppling the subject, predicate and object requires that the client can take those elements from the representation and shift them to a different media type. Objects is the trickiest (for example, taking an RDF Literal from RDF/XML and putting it into the body of an http request. Encoding and escaping (for example, in the case of strings) needs to be accounted for, since the body is not an XML document (or at least, I don't read it as being an XML document). Subject and predicate pose fewer problems. (IanGreen, 29-april-2010). * *Response*: this is no longer in the spec (DaveJohnson 05/21/2010)
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r6
<
r5
<
r4
<
r3
<
r2
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r6 - 05 Apr 2012 - 13:07:44 -
SteveSpeicher
Main
Main Web
Create New Topic
Index
Search
Changes
Notifications
RSS Feed
Statistics
Preferences
Webs
Main
Sandbox
TWiki
Български
Cesky
Dansk
Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
日本語
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Svenska
简体中文
簡體中文
Copyright � by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our
Terms of Use
Ideas, requests, problems regarding this site?
Send feedback