You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Just like RFC6690 has trouble providing a link from <something://explicit> to </>, current CoRAL inherits that very issue because the base is changed whenever we step into a node.
On 6690 I'd be tempted to go with rev rather than rel (if that were not deprecated), in CoRAL a workaround can be to just define a reverse term (as is common in RDF as well).
Unless we plan to do something about this (like a base-reset directive), I think it'd suffice to state that links to an unknown base URI are only possible from the base URI.
(Example point here is that in BLE, the server might have a really hard time a.k.a. have no chance to know which base URI the client sees; in the normal case client and server should usually agree on the base URI).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Just like RFC6690 has trouble providing a link from
<something://explicit>
to</>
, current CoRAL inherits that very issue because the base is changed whenever we step into a node.On 6690 I'd be tempted to go with
rev
rather thanrel
(if that were not deprecated), in CoRAL a workaround can be to just define a reverse term (as is common in RDF as well).Unless we plan to do something about this (like a base-reset directive), I think it'd suffice to state that links to an unknown base URI are only possible from the base URI.
(Example point here is that in BLE, the server might have a really hard time a.k.a. have no chance to know which base URI the client sees; in the normal case client and server should usually agree on the base URI).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: