ACTION-122: [EDITOR] Update spec to reflect resolution 12/16.2 close ISSUE-91, by adding that for an LDPC the link header is type=LDPC
[EDITOR] Update spec to reflect resolution 12/16.2 close ISSUE-91, by adding that for an LDPC the link header is type=LDPC
- State:
- closed
- Person:
- John Arwe
- Due on:
- January 13, 2014
- Created on:
- January 2, 2014
- Associated Product:
- Linked Data Platform Spec
- Related emails:
- LDP Rec (from eric@w3.org on 2015-02-20)
- Re: rel=type or rel=profile (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2014-01-15)
- Re: rel=type or rel=profile (from bertails@w3.org on 2014-01-15)
- Re: rel=type or rel=profile (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2014-01-15)
- Re: ldp-ISSUE-92 (interaction model): Change rel=type to rel=profile for client introspection of interaction model [Linked Data Platform Spec] (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2014-01-06)
- Re: ldp-ISSUE-92 (interaction model): Change rel=type to rel=profile for client introspection of interaction model [Linked Data Platform Spec] (from bertails@w3.org on 2014-01-06)
- ldp-ISSUE-92 (interaction model): Change rel=type to rel=profile for client introspection of interaction model [Linked Data Platform Spec] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2014-01-02)
Related notes:
resolution: http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2013-12-16#resolution_2
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-91, by adding that for an LDPC the link header is: Link: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Container>; rel="type"
change set: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/rev/83b656184387
FWIW, the resolution summary was simpler than reality. Issue 91 (and the discussion) also made it clear that this is "the only way" clients have to find out the interaction model, etc. This change set covers the entire issue, unless I missed something.John Arwe, 2 Jan 2014, 19:03:45
Display change log.