Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added specification of Link attribute token #1066

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Sep 10, 2019

Conversation

larsgsvensson
Copy link
Contributor

Copy link
Member

@RubenVerborgh RubenVerborgh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All good, thanks! Just minor nits.

the attribute <code>token</code> is used to specify
the mapping between the profile URI
(specified using the <code>anchor</code> attribute)
and a <a>token</a> used as an alternative to the full profile URI.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor comment, but perhaps the "mapping" language does not need to end up in the document. We talk about this mapping in the context of this WG, but the concept itself is probably not important to the document. So it could be fine to just write that the token is a (typically shorter) string that can be used by clients as an alternative to the full profile URI.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you proposing that the document just says "token is a (typically shorter) string that can be used by clients as an alternative to the full profile URI" and then examples, like the one you submitted in your earlier PR, carry the demonstration? I'd prefer this written explanation be included but perhaps I've missed what you're suggesting.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, that's what I am proposing. Along with the removal of the "mapping" language.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, that's what I am proposing. Along with the removal of the "mapping" language.

(i. e. the resource identified by the current request URI).
Servers MAY use a larger scope for their mappings
but clients should not depend on that
unless the server documentation explicitly gives other instructions.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

…through some other means?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you asking what other means could even be possible?

Perhaps something like OAI-PMH's metadatPrefix listing where the server lists the prefixes for all profiles for all resources in one place. Very different mechanism but wrappable as Conneg-by-P I've always thought.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I meant to explicitly say something like (verbatim) "through some other means" to emphasize that such means are not part of the spec.

unless the server documentation explicitly gives other instructions.
</p>
<p>
The ABNF for the profile attribute's value is <code>token</code>,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For the token attribute value?
Is quoted-string?

Is the Web Linking RFC not more appropriate here?

</p>
<pre id="eg-link-attribute-token" class="example nohighlight" aria-busy="false" aria-live="polite"
title="Using the Link attribute "token" to link a profile URI to a token">
# The profile URI in the "anchor" element is linked to the token "px"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just wondering whether px is a realistic name of a token. I also reused it myself, but I have no idea if this would be typical. 2 chars seem really short.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, really short. I've been using things like dcat or prov (Turtle prefixes) or well-known things like ISO + standard numbers. See examples of tokens in old view/format system in use: http://pid.geoscience.gov.au/sample/AU100?_view=alternates

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

^ let's perhaps use one of these?

Copy link
Contributor

@nicholascar nicholascar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fine by me too. Some replies to @RubenVerborgh 's points inline. I've not merged already only so @larsgsvensson can read all those comments before merging.

@rob-metalinkage rob-metalinkage merged commit a7e98d2 into gh-pages Sep 10, 2019
@rob-metalinkage rob-metalinkage deleted the larsgsvensson-link-attribute-token branch September 10, 2019 22:40
@larsgsvensson larsgsvensson restored the larsgsvensson-link-attribute-token branch September 11, 2019 06:29
larsgsvensson added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2019
* Removed "mapping" language
* Added "through some other means" to "server gives other instructions"
* The value of the "token" attribute is now `( token / quoted-string )` since that is what's used in [§3 of RFC 8288](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288#section-3)
* Replaced the dummy example with one from [Nick's geoscience list](http://pid.geoscience.gov.au/sample/AU100?_view=alternates)
nicholascar added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2019
@nicholascar nicholascar deleted the larsgsvensson-link-attribute-token branch November 26, 2019 08:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants