[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: Media types
Paul, > -----Original Message----- > From: Tyson, Paul H [mailto:ptyson@bh.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 3:38 PM > To: Sinnema, Remon; xacml@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: Media types > > Following your reasoning that media types are used mainly for content > negotiation, why do we even need specialized media types for XACML? http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3023#page-32 There could be other XML based formats that represent the same information as application/xacml+xml. For instance, a policy could potentially also be represented by RDF-XML (application/rdf+xml). > The currently defined top-level syntactic entities--Policy, PolicySet, > Request, Response--will just be "text/xml". http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3023#section-3 Anything in the "text" branch is supposed to be readable for a *casual* user. That's definitely not the case for XACML, so we need a media type from the "application" branch. > If we do move forward with an "application/xacml+json" type, I don't > think the profile should include examples. The TC has not specified any > JSON representation of XACML entities, and the examples in this profile > would be misleading. The profile should state clearly that this media > type does not imply any particular mapping from XACML XML syntax to > JSON data structures. The JSON format needs to be defined somewhere, or else JSON based systems can't interoperate. So we have two options: (1) We define the JSON representation in this profile (2) We create a separate JSON profile and refer to that from here I was shooting for (1), with the examples being the "specification" of the JSON format. Unfortunately, there is no JSON equivalent of XML Schema. I think the best we can do is something like this: http://amundsen.com/media-types/collection/format/#objects Thanks, Ray
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]