Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FCREPO-1443 fcrepo-client should use Link rel="describedby" header for description #34

Conversation

jrgriffiniii
Copy link

There were several possible approaches to this problem, and I have attempted to resolve this in the following manner:

When retrieving the URI path for Datastreams of non-RDF resources, a HEAD request must be passed against the resource in order to determine whether or not the "Link" header is passed in the response, and, (if it is) to identify the URI for the linked resource containing the metadata for the resource.

Please let me know if this is not the most efficient manner of attempting to identify the linked metadata resource (i. e. should I not be transmitting a HEAD request), and I shall work to implement a more optimized solution.

commit 0030789
Author: griffinj@lafayette.edu <griffinj@lafayette.edu>
Date:   Fri Oct 30 15:14:50 2015 +0000

    FCREPO-1443 #time 15m Cleaning problems in formatting; Reducing unnecessary modifications made from the insertions/deletions of whitespace

commit 7c98991
Merge: 31aa509 3928cec
Author: griffinj@lafayette.edu <griffinj@lafayette.edu>
Date:   Fri Oct 30 14:58:15 2015 +0000

    Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/fcrepo4-labs/fcrepo4-client into fcrepo-1443-jrgriffiniii

commit 31aa509
Author: griffinj@lafayette.edu <griffinj@lafayette.edu>
Date:   Wed Oct 28 16:23:51 2015 +0000

    FCREPO-1443 #time 1h Ensuring that FedoraDatastreamImpl#getPropertiesPath always returns a relative URI path for non-RDF resources linked to descriptions within the ""Link" header; Resolving issues for FedoraRepositoryImplIT

commit 336f6c0
Author: griffinj@lafayette.edu <griffinj@lafayette.edu>
Date:   Tue Oct 27 22:30:08 2015 +0000

    FCREPO-1443 #time 2h Resolving issues within FedoraDatastreamImplTest#testGetPropertiesPath; Restructuring the FedoraDatastreamImpl#getPropertiesPath to use the Stream API and cleaning code styling errors

commit 5eae9ee
Author: griffinj@lafayette.edu <griffinj@lafayette.edu>
Date:   Tue Oct 27 18:28:30 2015 +0000

    FCREPO-1443 #time 3d Restructuring FedoraDatastreamImpl#getPropertiesPath in order to inspect the headers exposed for Datastream resources when resolving the URI paths for related, describing resources (i. e. metadata nodes for Datastreams)

commit 3928cec
Merge: a3ef377 7555313
Author: Jared Whiklo <jwhiklo@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon Oct 26 21:57:23 2015 -0500

    Merge pull request fcrepo4-labs#33 from awoods/fcrepo-1755

    Update create-version response code

commit 7555313
Author: Andrew Woods <awoods@duraspace.org>
Date:   Tue Oct 20 15:49:44 2015 -0400

    Update create-version response code

    Related to: https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/FCREPO-1755
final Link descLink = descLinks.stream().findFirst().get();

// This must be a relative URL
descriptionPath = descLink.getUri().toString().replace(repository.getRepositoryUrl(), "");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Caching the descriptionPath would likely make sense since its value can be assumed not to be dynamic between client requests.

@awoods
Copy link
Member

awoods commented Dec 13, 2015

@escowles? @acoburn? @mikedurbin? Is the tide moving quickly enough towards https://github.com/fcrepo4-exts/fcrepo-java-client to make additional energy in this PR futile?

@acoburn
Copy link
Contributor

acoburn commented Dec 14, 2015

This was discussed on the last tech call, and while it was agreed that future efforts should be directed toward the fcrepo-java-client, there is good work here that may have value to the community beyond the scope of this particular project. I feel that if @jrgriffiniii wants to carry this PR through completion, we should support that. If not, the PR and corresponding ticket should be closed.

@awoods
Copy link
Member

awoods commented Dec 14, 2015

Sounds good to me, @acoburn. Let's move this PR forward, @jrgriffiniii.
#34 (comment)

@jrgriffiniii
Copy link
Author

Closing this in response to being contacted by @acoburn regarding the status of the issue, and confirming with both he and @escowles that this would be indeed be best deprecated in favor of directing parties to use the new Java client.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants