On 31/03/11 17:22, Tim Brody wrote: > "SE-IRI > The SWORD Edit IRI. This is the IRI to which clients may POST > additional content to an Atom Entry Resource. This MAY be the > same as the Edit-IRI, but is defined separately as it supports > HTTP POST explicitly while the Edit-IRI is defined by [AtomPub] > as limited to GET, PUT and DELETE operations." > > versus > > "The client can assert that a deposit process has completed by issuing > an HTTP POST to the Edit-IRI with a blank message body and with the > In-Progress header set to false (it may simply omit the header > altogether too, as this is treated as In-Progress: false by the > server)."
oops! well spotted. Cheers, Richard > > /Tim. > > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 18:49 +0100, Richard Jones wrote: >> Hi Folks, >> >> I've put a new version of the spec up on the website based on the recent >> feedback from the list: >> >> http://swordapp.org/sword-v2/sword-v2-specifications/ >> >> The main changes that were made are as follows: >> >> 1/ Changed all relevant instances of URI to IRI. I think I got them >> all, but if you spot any inconsistencies let me know. >> >> 2/ Provided a better introduction with text from the business >> case/technical approach document >> >> 3/ Corrected the identifiers to which 6.6.2 and 6.6.3 referred >> >> 4/ Added 2 new sections covering overwriting metadata or overwriting >> with Atom Multipart (sections 6.5.2 and 6.5.3), which were missing from >> the previous version >> >> 5/ Added a new section (6.10) on the use of SWORD on arbitrary IRIs in >> order to clarify how it should be used alongside other standards like >> CMIS, GData, OData, or just plain old REST >> >> 6/ Removed the use of 202 (Accepted) as an HTTP response code to any request >> >> 7/ Better introduction to the Metadata Handling section >> >> 8/ Removed usage of In-Progress header on IRIs which do not represent >> the container (i.e. the Atom Entry). >> >> 9/ Better introduction to the Continued Deposit section, and the >> addition of a section on how to complete an In-Progress deposit >> >> 10/ Added a new IRI type which I have called the SE-IRI (SWORD Edit IRI) >> which is identified by the @rel value >> "http://purl.net/org/sword/terms/add";, and is used to identify the IRI >> which can be used to do HTTP POST against for adding content to a >> container. I updated all the references for HTTP POST operations to >> refer to this IRI, and added it and an explanation of its relation to >> Edit-IRI near the top of the document. Note this doesn't strictly add a >> new IRI to be maintained, the atom:link can still point to the Edit-IRI, >> but their usage is distinguished as per the previous discussions on this >> list >> >> 11/ Changed the rules for default packaging so that in the event that a >> server does not announce any packaging, the client will assume that none >> is supported. I believe this means that SWORD now fully simplifies to >> plain old AtomPub without confusion. >> >> 12/ Changed the old IRI which represented the zip package to be >> http://purl.net/org/sword/package/SimpleZip, which is more descriptive. >> >> There are, we know, still some comments on the list which haven't been >> addressed. These will be looked at next in tandem with an effort to >> start the development of the clients and servers, as we feel that >> there's not a lot more we can get out without first having a go at the >> implementations. Therefore, if you have commented on the list since >> last week, we will go through and make a list of all the points and look >> at them alongside the development process. >> >> There are just a couple of questions we have regarding the latest changes: >> >> a/ Can anyone see any obstacles in the spec to using another APP based >> protocol in parallel. We are thinking CMIS and GData, obviously, but >> also perhaps others like OData. It's important that SWORD not prove an >> obstacle to them. >> >> b/ Are there any other @rel values that we need to create to accurately >> describe SWORD specific operations which aren't purely APP operations? >> Looking over the profile when writing this version of the spec, it was >> only the SE-IRI that we picked up. Have we missed anything? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Richard >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Create and publish websites with WebMatrix >> Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; >> WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and >> publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Sword-app-techadvisorypanel mailing list >> Sword-app-techadvisorypanel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sword-app-techadvisorypanel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Create and publish websites with WebMatrix > Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; > WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and > publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf > _______________________________________________ > Sword-app-techadvisorypanel mailing list > Sword-app-techadvisorypanel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sword-app-techadvisorypanel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Create and publish websites with WebMatrix Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf _______________________________________________ Sword-app-techadvisorypanel mailing list Sword-app-techadvisorypanel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sword-app-techadvisorypanel
