On 2009-09-16, at 3:42 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
You can always use
something else other than Accept header to make this query different.
But the issue here is about registration. If we register both, we need to deal
with the existing (and incompatible) use of application/xrds+xml. We need to
list all the existing applications using it, detail interoperability issues,
etc. This is not impossible but it is not fun either. The current deployed
expectation for application/xrds+xml is to get an XRDS (2.0) document. We will
need to address it.
Since we are using the same namespace, it would be perfectly legal to return an
XRDS (XRD 1.0) document for the xrd+xml mime type. My question is if that is
enough? If the only use case is the one provided below, I think the right
solution is to change the resolver interface and not register the xrds+xml type.
I don't feel strongly about this.
EHL
-----Original
Message-----
From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 12:35 PM
To: 'XRI TC'
Cc: 'John Bradley'
Subject: RE: [xri] XRDS media type
I missed the start of this thread, but here's the specific use case I
can
speak to for XRI Resolution 3.0:
In some cases an XRD consumer (acting as an XRI 3.0 resolver) will want
to
request JUST an XRD from an XRD provider (acting as an XRI 3.0
authority).
That means that no matter how many XRI 3.0 resolution steps (linked
XRDs)
the provider needs to request, the consumer only wants the final XRD
back.
In this case the XRD consumer can make a request asking for content-
type
application/xrd+xml.
In other cases the XRD consumer may want the entire sequence of XRDs
retrieved by the XRD provider. In this case the XRD consumer can make a
request asking for content-type application/xrds+xml.
So, unless I'm missing something, we actually need both mime types.
=Drummond
-----Original Message-----
From: Eran Hammer-Lahav [mailto:eran@hueniverse.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 6:58 PM
To: Scott Cantor; 'XRI TC'
Subject: RE: [xri] XRDS media type
Yes, there was which is actually used already (application/xrds+xml).
This
is why I am asking because if we register both, we will need to deal
with
the existing deployment which is not compliant. So I rather just
register
one.
EHL
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Cantor [mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 6:54 PM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; 'XRI TC'
Subject: RE: [xri] XRDS media type
Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote on 2009-09-15:
I am assuming that a document with a root of <XRDS> but using the
XRD
XML
namespace is considered application/xrd+xml and not
application/xrds+xml...
Since they both use the same schema.
They don't have to, but it's typical to do that.
Was there a media type for the original XRDS?
Either way it's confusing, I guess.
-- Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-
open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php