[Sword-TAP] the scope of sword

2011-03-21 Thread Richard Jones
Hi Folks, There's been some great discussion on the list this past week or two, and I thought it might be time for a summary of what looks to me to be a key sticking point: the scope of sword. There are two distinct sides to this argument as it's been articulated on this list: a) That we shou

Re: [Sword-TAP] My Thoughts

2011-03-21 Thread Richard Jones
Hi Scott, >> 6.6. Adding Content to a Resource I'll get onto this and point, just as a pointer however look at the 'Creating a folder' section in the GDocs API. >>> >>> This whole area of SWORD (secs 6.4-6.6) is effectively doing the same job >>> as CMIS. Is there a good reaso

Re: [Sword-TAP] My Thoughts

2011-03-21 Thread Richard Jones
Hi Dave, >>> 6.4. Editing the Content of a Resource >>> >>> The client MAY provide an In-Progress header with a value of true or false >>> [SWORD001] >> >>> 6.5. Deleting the Content of a Resource >>> >>> Should return the 200 header representing what has happened. >>> >>> I'm against the delete

Re: [Sword-TAP] An example Implementation (VIDEO)

2011-03-21 Thread Richard Jones
Hi Ian, On 18/03/11 09:11, Ian Stuart wrote: > On 17/03/11 19:37, Richard Jones wrote: >>> In this second, expanded, view there are three things one need to define >>> within the discussion >>> >>> 1) What the singular Thing is: a (zip|xml|csv|xyz) file >>> 2) What "standard" the manifest file is

Re: [Sword-TAP] My Thoughts

2011-03-21 Thread Richard Jones
Hi Tim, I believe that the SWORD spec already meets these requirements of yours: > What I've been pushing for with SWORD is: > 1) Re-use sensible paradigms from existing AtomPub profiles (CMIS/GData) Well, it explicitly doesn't get in the way of you using them, I don't believe. Although if you

Re: [Sword-TAP] My Thoughts

2011-03-21 Thread Richard Jones
Hi Scott, >> I think someone >> earlier pointed out our methodology is RFC-orientated i.e. minimal, >> well-defined and, where relevant, re-using existing Internet RFCs. CMIS, by >> comparison, defines a full query language, ACLs, CMS-orientated APIs ... > > Exactly, which is why this new "packag

[Sword-TAP] planned changes to next spec draft

2011-03-21 Thread Richard Jones
Hi Folks, Just a quick summary of changes to be made to the profile in the next version. Did I miss anything? 1/ 6.6.2 and 6.6.3 are incorrect in their description of the usage of POST on the URIs. This needs to be clarified. 2/ Add a section describing how to use SWORD headers/techniques on