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

URI for notification #19

Closed
rhiaro opened this issue Jul 3, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

URI for notification #19

rhiaro opened this issue Jul 3, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@rhiaro
Copy link
Member

rhiaro commented Jul 3, 2016

Do we need to say anything about the receiver being responsible for generating a URI for a notification sent to the inbox? LDP says:

5.2.3.7 LDP servers creating a LDP-RS via POST MUST interpret the null relative URI for the subject of triples in the LDP-RS representation in the request entity body as identifying the entity in the request body. Commonly, that entity is the model for the "to be created" LDPR, so triples whose subject is the null relative URI result in triples in the created resource whose subject is the created resource.

5.2.3.8 LDP servers SHOULD assign the URI for the resource to be created using server application specific rules in the absence of a client hint.

5.2.3.9 LDP servers SHOULD allow clients to create new resources without requiring detailed knowledge of application-specific constraints. This is a consequence of the requirement to enable simple creation and modification of LDPRs. LDP servers expose these application-specific constraints as described in section 4.2.1 General.

5.2.3.10 LDP servers MAY allow clients to suggest the URI for a resource created through POST, using the HTTP Slug header as defined in [RFC5023]. LDP adds no new requirements to this usage, so its presence functions as a client hint to the server providing a desired string to be incorporated into the server's final choice of resource URI.

We could perhaps say this more succinctly.

@csarven
Copy link
Member

csarven commented Jul 8, 2016

See also #17

@csarven
Copy link
Member

csarven commented Jul 13, 2016

Covered through commits in issue #22

@csarven csarven closed this as completed Jul 13, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants