Dragos,

Yes, the first two match the oslc.where clause.

I disagree that the server should report an error. The query is run 
against the graph of triples known to the service, and the service returns 
the matches on that graph. The meaning of the result set is scoped to what 
the service knows.

It is certainly possible that the third resource could have 
oslc:shortTitle="Some defect" in another graph (e.g. obtained by 
referencing the resource and getting its representation) since any service 
might have triples about any resource in its graph. That is consistent 
with the Open World assumption behind Linked Data and RDF. 

The query result must be understood in the context of the graph you are 
querying. If your application needs more data then you should run the 
query on a bigger graph, e.g. one created by an indexer. 


Regards, 
___________________________________________________________________________ 

Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE

Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management
IBM Software, Rational
Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063





From:
Dragos Cojocari <[email protected]>
To:
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
Cc:
[email protected], [email protected]
Date:
01/12/2011 09:25 AM
Subject:
Re: [oslc-core] Behavior of oslc.where and oslc.sort if resources are not 
managed by the service provider



Hey Arthur, 

thanks for the reply.  The first two resources both have 
oslc:shortTitle="Some defect" so I assume both will be included. But what 
if the 3rd one, the one not managed by the service provider also has 
oslc:shortTitle="Some defect"? The service provider doesn't know that so 
it won't include that in the result. In my opinion that is incorrect, 
since the result set is not full. I think that reporting an error if the 
service provider cannot verify the filter/sort for all the collection 
members would be more rigorous. What do you think? 

Regards, 
        Dragos 



Arthur Ryman <[email protected]> 
12/01/2011 16:18 


To
Dragos Cojocari/Romania/IBM@IBMRO 
cc
[email protected], [email protected] 
Subject
Re: [oslc-core] Behavior of oslc.where and oslc.sort if resources are not 
managed by the service provider








Dragos,

BTW, the query result is just the first resource since it matches 
oslc:shortTitle="Some defect" 

Regards, 
___________________________________________________________________________ 


Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE

Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management
IBM Software, Rational
Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063





From:
Dragos Cojocari <[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Date:
01/12/2011 08:12 AM
Subject:
[oslc-core] Behavior of oslc.where and oslc.sort if resources are not 
managed by the service provider
Sent by:
[email protected]



Hey everyone, 

and a Happy new year. 

I'd like to understand what is the defined behaviour if a query specifies 
in its where/orderBy clause and the collection of resources contains 
resources not managed by the service provider and the serviceprovider 
cannot filter/sort them. What should the provider do: 
- reject the response with an error 
- include only the resources for which the filter/sort can be calculated 
- undefined 

Example data: 




So for the data above what is the expected result for the following query: 


http://<server>:<post>/defects?oslc.select=*&oslc.where=oslc:shortTitle="Some 

defect" 

Regards, 
       Dragos

Exceptand situatiile in care partile au convenit in alt mod: / Unless 
stated otherwise above:
IBM România S.R.L.
Bucharest Business Park, Corp A2, Şos. Bucureşti-Ploieşti Nr. 1A, 013681
Bucureşti 1, ROMANIA
CIF RO378660, RC J/40/5106/1991
Cap.Soc. 41.670 Lei_______________________________________________
Oslc-Core mailing list
[email protected]
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net






Exceptand situatiile in care partile au convenit in alt mod: / Unless 
stated otherwise above:
IBM România S.R.L.
Bucharest Business Park, Corp A2, Şos. Bucureşti-Ploieşti Nr. 1A, 013681
Bucureşti 1, ROMANIA
CIF RO378660, RC J/40/5106/1991
Cap.Soc. 41.670 Lei



Reply via email to