Page History

...

1. LDPRv  – has child → LDPCv – has children → LDPRm(s)
   as long as we do not generate ldp:contains triples on the LDPRv for the LDPCv using this Predicate. We can ensure that deleting a LDPRv will remove the LDPCv and deleting the LDPCv with delete all the LDPRm(s).
2. How do we do the above filtering? 
   1. Do we add new RDF types (fcrepo-specification issue 233)? 
   2. Do we just add a property to the JCR node?
3. A GET or HEAD request to a timemap (LDPCv) should return all LDRm(s) and their start-end ranges. 
   1. Do we want to generate this list on the fly or store it on the LDPCv and update it on any create/update or delete?
   2. The Memento-Datetime provided when creating a LDPRm (or the current date) indicates the start datetime of that version.
      1. would the end datetime be the next update to the LDPRv?
      2. would it be the lastModified date of the LDPRv?
4. Datetime negotiation of the LDPRv (URI-R) meaning a request to the LDPRv with an Accept-Datetime header can return either
   1. a 200 OK status and a Content-Location header with the address of the LDPRm (URI-M), if this is a GET request the LDPRm body should be returned too.
   2. a 302 Found status and a Location header with the address of the LDPRm (URI-M), the client must make a direct GET request to the provided Location URI.
   3. which of the above two is better. A provides the body in one request (a GET to the LDPRv), but B does not use Content-Location that we already use for external content.
      
      

Design Implementation

If some of this is crazy or overkill, please don't do it. I'm finding it harder to create interface and classes than I expected without actually writing any code.

...