[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Feedback on
Eran, Mark: here is my feedback (however slight) on: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-site-meta-01.txt A) Section 3.1 When the link URI is relative, its base URI is the root resource of the authority. For example, in the example above, if the authority is "example.com", the full link URI would be "http://example.com/me". First, the "example above" in section 3.1 does not appear to be the "/me" example. Second, the word "example" is overused in this sentence. Maybe, "For instance..." B) Am I brain-dead, or did the URI templates feature disappear? Wasn't that in earlier drafts? C) Overall, I like very much the way this specification now aligns with the Link Header specification (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-04.tx t). In fact the alignment is becoming so close that it would seem to make sense to reference that spec. D) On that note, my final suggestion is with regard to the name: you went from /site-meta to /host-meta, but given the alignment with the terminology of Link Header, wouldn't /context-meta be most appropriate? This also aligns with the use of the term "context" in the Higgins Project (which spent several years evolving terminology relative to data abstraction) and the OASIS XDI TC. Hope this helps, =Drummond
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]