Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • Previously, cbeer had added this functionality, but it had been later removed
  • Is data structured for this in modeshape to be reasonably performant?
  • Mike: Was one of the agitators for this, opposed it being cut
    • Some stuff is inferred, some not directly searchable
    • What types of queries do we want to support?
    • What exceptions are we willing to tolerate?
    • Extension spec?
    • Is it okay if it doesn't work consistently on server managed triples, like date fields?
    • Just wants to be able to search dc:identifier. This would work, modeshape has an index that can be searched.
  • Esme: Valkyie, making a list of queries that the repository needed.
    • Needed queries
      • all objects of given type
      • Doing a search for dc:identifiers
      • They will come up with a list of queries they need
  • Danny: Would it be helpful at this point to fill out the list
    • Discuss some of the known limitations of modeshape's internal indices
      • Mike: Last modified date is across two fields. Might need to normalize way stored in fedora. Need to work out if this is needed
      • Esme: Types and containment triples are harder to make searchable
      • Search for non-server managed triples that are directly assigned are easy.
      • RDF type are not stored in the index modeshape maintains. That is inserted into responses.
      • Use case: find all objects of a type in order to do bulk object on it
      • Can't search on fcr namespace and ldp namespace. Might be okay to not support those, but it would be weird to have an LDP server that didn't support it
      • Could add support for this in after if there is demand for it
  • Mike will start document to gather first pass at known limitations of implementation and requirements

5. Tickets requiring attention

  • 2520
    • Bethany would like more feedback on what expectations are for mimetype
    • She will take another look at it to try to work through what the validation issue is
  • 2650
    • Bethany will take a look
  • 2544
    • there was a work around for that, using a different accept type. No one has strong feelings that it shouldn't be closed, so will make a note on ticket
    • Josh - as a larger strategy, this is something we will need to address
    • Paging mechanism is problematic in RDF rest api, but something we will need to deal with
    • Work around okay for now, but many members issue needs to be addressed in future implementations

Action Items

Action: Check in with Andrew about completeness of the test suite

...