Proposal for HTTP header Configuration-Context (was: [oslc-core] Agenda for 15 May 2014)

[Steve K Speicher <sspeiche@us.ibm.com>]

> From: Nick Crossley/Irvine/IBM@IBMUS
> To: oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org
> Date: 05/14/2014 02:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Agenda for 15 May 2014
> Sent by: <oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> Arnaud,
> 
> I am unable to attend tomorrow, since I am doing an eWeek presentation 
at a 
> local school.
> 
> I have one bit of other business: for OSLC Configuration Management, I 
need 
> to propose a new standard http header, communicating the configuration 
> context to be used for the request. A question is whether headers 
proposed 
> by OSLC TCs should just use a bare name that is relevant to the purpose, 
or 
> whether they should have an OSLC prefix. For the OSLC Configuration 
> Management context header, I am currently proposing the header 
> 'Configuration-Context' - but should this be 
'OSLC-Configuration-Context'? 
> Existing practice does not, in general, prefix each header with the 
> organization proposing that header - see 
http://www.iana.org/assignments/
> message-headers/message-headers.xhtml.
> 

+1 for Configuration-Context 

Thanks,
Steve Speicher
IBM Rational Software
OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
http://open-services.net