--- a/ldp-paging.html Tue Jun 10 10:43:58 2014 -0400
+++ b/ldp-paging.html Tue Jun 10 11:39:03 2014 -0400
@@ -111,6 +111,26 @@
, status: "Proposed Standard"
, publisher: "IETF"
},
+ "RFC7231": {
+ title: "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content"
+ , href: "http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231"
+ , authors: [
+ "R. Fielding"
+ , "J. Reschke"
+ ]
+ , status: "Proposed Standard"
+ , publisher: "IETF"
+ },
+ "RFC7232": {
+ title: "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Conditional Requests"
+ , href: "http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7232"
+ , authors: [
+ "R. Fielding"
+ , "J. Reschke"
+ ]
+ , status: "Proposed Standard"
+ , publisher: "IETF"
+ },
"READ-COMMITTED": {
title: "Wikipedia: Isolation (database systems)"
, href: "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolation_%28database_systems%29#Read_committed"
@@ -235,6 +255,14 @@
Resource representations by splitting up the responses into separate URL-addressable page resources.
</section>
+ <section id='sotd'>
+ <p>
+
+ </p>
+ <div class="atrisk" id="atrisk-paging"><p class="atrisktext">UNDER CONSTRUCTION</p>
+ </div>
+ </section>
+
<section class="informative" id="intro">
<!-- TODO: Move bulk of paging intro here - it's not rocket science -->
<h1>Introduction</h1>
@@ -296,8 +324,8 @@
<section id="terms-from-paging">
<h2>Terms normatively defined by this specification</h2>
-<p>The following terminology is based on W3C's Architecture of the World Wide Web [[WEBARCH]],
- Hyper-text Transfer Protocol [[HTTP11]] and Linked Data Platform [[LDP]].
+<p>The following terminology is based on W3C's Architecture of the World Wide Web [[!WEBARCH]],
+ Hyper-text Transfer Protocol ([[!RFC7230]], [[!RFC7231]]) and Linked Data Platform [[!LDP]].
</p>
<dl class="glossary">
<dt><dfn>Paged resource</dfn></dt>
@@ -845,10 +873,10 @@
link relation type is <code>canonical</code>,
and
link extension parameters include the parameter name <code>etag</code>
- and a corresponding parameter value identical to the ETag [[!HTTP11]]
+ and a corresponding parameter value identical to the ETag [[!RFC7232]]
of the <a>paged resource</a>.
For example: <code>Link: <http://example.org/customer-relations>; rel='canonical'; etag="customer-relations-v1"</code>
- </h2></section><!-- TODO: change http11 to bis -->
+ </h2></section>
<section id="ldpr-pagingGET-sequences-change"><h2 class="normal">
<a title="LDP Paging server">LDP Paging servers</a> MAY
@@ -1377,6 +1405,7 @@
<!-- <blockquote><em><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-ldp-paging-20140930/">Candidate Recommendation Draft</a></em></blockquote> wah -->
<!-- <blockquote><em><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-ldp-paging-20140730/">Last Call Draft</a></em></blockquote> -->
<ul>
+ <li>2014-06-10 - Use http-bis and Prefer RFC numbers, adjust BNF to match bis changes (JA) </li>
<li>2014-05-22 - Spec membership & containment triples on same page (JA) </li>
<li>2014-05-22 - Spec syntax for page size hint; still need to wrap more text and examples around it (JA) </li>
<li>2014-05-20 - Spec Sandro's proposal, choose link relation for detection of paged resource changes (JA) </li>
--- a/ldp.html Tue Jun 10 10:43:58 2014 -0400
+++ b/ldp.html Tue Jun 10 11:39:03 2014 -0400
@@ -574,7 +574,7 @@
<section id="ldpr-general">
<h2>General</h2>
- <section id="ldpr-gen-http"><h2 class="normal"><a title="LDP server">LDP servers</a> MUST at least be HTTP/1.1 conformant servers [[!HTTP11]].
+ <section id="ldpr-gen-http"><h2 class="normal"><a title="LDP server">LDP servers</a> MUST at least be HTTP/1.1 conformant servers [[!RFC7230]].
</h2></section><!-- Was 4.2.1 / #ldpr-4_2_1 -->
<section id="ldpr-gen-binary"><h2 class="normal"><a title="LDP server">LDP servers</a> MAY host a mixture of <a title="Linked Data Platform RDF Source">LDP-RSs</a>
@@ -791,7 +791,7 @@
<section id="ldpr-HTTP_OPTIONS">
<h2>HTTP OPTIONS</h2>
<p>This specification imposes the following new requirements on HTTP <code>OPTIONS</code> for LDPRs
- beyond those in [[!HTTP11]]. Other sections of this specification, for example
+ beyond those in [[!RFC7231]]. Other sections of this specification, for example
<a href="#ldpr-HTTP_PATCH">PATCH</a>,
<a href="#header-accept-post">Accept-Post</a>,
add other requirements on <code>OPTIONS</code> responses.
@@ -1965,11 +1965,14 @@
</p>
<section id="header-accept-post-1"><h2 class="normal">The syntax for <code>Accept-Post</code>, using
- the ABNF syntax defined in Section 2.1 of [[!HTTP11]], is:</h2>
- <blockquote><code>Accept-Post = "Accept-Post" ":" 1#media-type</code>
+ the ABNF syntax defined in Section 1.2 of [[!RFC7231]], is:</h2>
+ <blockquote><code>Accept-Post = "Accept-Post" ":" # media-range </code>
<p>
- The <code>Accept-Post</code> header specifies a comma-separated list of media-
- types (with optional parameters) as defined by [[!HTTP11]], Section 3.7.
+ The <code>Accept-Post</code> header specifies a comma-separated list of media
+ ranges (with optional parameters) as defined by [[!RFC7231]], Section 5.3.2.
+ The <code>Accept-Post</code> header, in effect, uses the same syntax as the
+ HTTP <code>Accept</code> header minus the optional <code>accept-params</code> BNF production,
+ since the latter does not apply to <code>Accept-Post</code>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</section><!-- Was 6.1.1 / #header-accept-post-1 -->
@@ -2422,11 +2425,13 @@
<li>Duplication (with intent to supersede) of the <code>describedby</code> relation type IANA registration, incorporating POWDER's relevant errata</li>
<li>Clarify definitions of membership and containment triples to avoid impression that they must be (stored as) part of the LDP-RS's state.</li>
<li>Servers should offer/accept JSON-LD representations of LDP-RSs</li>
+ <li>Updated all HTTP and Prefer-draft references to newly assigned RFC numbers, with associated BNF hits</li>
</ul>
<h2>Detailed history</h2>
<!-- <blockquote><em><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-ldp-20130930/">Candidate Recommendation Draft</a></em></blockquote> -->
<ul>
+ <li>2014-06-10 - Use http-bis and Prefer RFC numbers, adjust BNF to match bis changes (JA) </li>
<li>2014-06-05 - Fixed LC1 date in change history pseudo-heading, was 2014 (JA) </li>
<li>2014-05-19 - Revert membership definition to be about LDPCs, not LDP-RS's (JA) </li>
<li>2014-05-09 - Respond to Joe Ross's LC2 comments (JA) </li>