You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 8 Next »

Time/Place

This meeting is a hybrid teleconference and IRC chat. Anyone is welcome to join...here's the info:

Attendees 

Agenda

  1. Last-Modified date design

  2. Hash fragments: review description

  3. Tickets to be removed?

    type key summary assignee reporter priority status resolution created updated due

    Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

  4. Investigating alternative ISPN backends:  Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.
  5. Code4Lib Philly post-conference event?
  6. Next release?

  7. ...

Ticket Summaries

  1. Please squash a bug!

    type key summary assignee reporter priority status resolution created updated due

    Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

  2. Tickets resolved this week:

    key summary type created updated due assignee reporter priority status resolution

    Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

  3. Tickets created this week:

    key summary type created updated due assignee reporter priority status resolution

    Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

Minutes

  1. Last-Modified date design

    1. Andrew: Last-Modified wasn't changing when IndirectContainers were creating new child links

    2. Esme: Also updating when inbound links were created (because we were creating reciprocal links)
      1. Action: Esme: add to the design page
      2. Experimenting with explicitly managing our own last-modified property, or not creating reciprocal links
    3. Jared: Would that work include the various last-modified properties in the design page?
    4. Esme: No, that would be another ticket and could be more involved.
      1. I'll push my branch up and update the relevant ticket so people could find the work if they had time to look at this

  2. Hash fragments: review description

    1. Andrew: We should more description of the intended behavior to drive the implementation discussion

    2. Aaron: Are we talking about a specification like a TCK would involve?
      1. Hash fragments are not repository resources
        1. They can have properties, updated with standard CRUD operations (POST, PUT, and PATCH)
        2. Their properties would be included with their parent resource's properties
        3. Any repository resource can link to hash fragments without restriction, or management by the repository (e.g. their base URI wouldn't necessarily be adjusted if the repository base URI was changed).
    3. Adam: hash fragments can be created anywhere using the standard CRUD operations
    4. Esme: there are some permutations of hash fragments as objects:
      1. existing in the base resource
      2. pointing to another repository resource that exists
      3. pointing to a repository resource that doesn't exist
    5. Esme: there is some tension between referential integrity enforcement (which we want in many cases), against supporting full-featured linking like we expect on the open web
    6. Aaron: some of the use cases might have contradictory demands
    7. Andrew: we should be aware of this possibility and try to prioritize use cases.

  3. Tickets to be removed?

  4. Investigating alternative ISPN backends:
  5. Code4Lib Philly post-conference event?
  6. Next release?
  • No labels

All content on the LYRASIS Wiki is licensed under the CC BY (Attribution) license, unless otherwise noted.