Sorry about the previous blank message everyone. I fell on my keyboard :)
On 11/7/05, Thomas Broyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ snip ] > > I can see two point of views / models. We definitely need to choose one > or the other and make that clear for everyone. Maybe the Chairs could > call for consensus. > > 1. Collections are containers for Entries > You create an entry by POSTing to the Collection URI. > When you POST the same Entry to another Collection, a new URI is > assigned (TBD: might theses two URIs point to the same resource or > should it be a copy? corollary: when you PUT on an URI, and GET on the > other one, are the changes reflected?) > When an entry is DELETEd, this shows up immediately in the Collection > membership listing (mark as deleted, or don't show anymore; this is > another question, related to syncing). If an Entry has two URIs, only > the Collection that created that URI on the HTTP POST is updated, as the > Entry still exists /via/ the other(s) URI(s) belonging to other Collections. > This is a similar approach than having Collections as directories [1] > and Entries as hard links [2]. > > 2. Collections are containers for URIs or Entries > When you POST an Entry to the Collection URI, this has actually two > effects: create the Entry resource and assign it an URI _and_ add that > URI to the Collection. > When you POST the same Entry to another Collection, the server can reuse > the same URI (after having searched for the atom:id in its whole entry > store) or it makes a copy (and assigns a new URI; when PUTting on an URI > and GETting at the other one, changes are _not_ reflected). > When an Entry is DELETEd, Collections referring to it _might_ not be > updated and still list the Entry (broken link) > This is a similar approach than having Collections as directories [1] > and Entries as symlinks [3] (with potential broken links). > 3. Listing resources and creating resources are orthogonal operations. What appears in a listing may be based on anything at all and using this metaphor of a "collection" is misleading. I think the answers to many of the questions above are application specific and we ought not spec them in a protocol. - Luke
