W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1997

Re: feature negotiation syntax

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:23:35 PDT
Message-Id: <3378A397.C89@parc.xerox.com>
To: "David W. Morris" <dwm@xpasc.com>
Cc: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3258
It might be possible to have two URLs that reference the "same"
resource, but that equivalence is complex and hardly anything
that you want to have going on in your feature negotiation
algorithm or protocol determination. The use of URLs at all
in this area is somewhat suspect; yes, it's a distributed
name space that doesn't require prior registration to use, but
it's somewhat problematic over time. For example, let's suppose
that NaviSoft had implemented an interesting protocol extension
that was an integral part of the NaviPress web authoring tool;
when AOL bought NaviSoft, the navisoft web server went away.
The protocol extension has to have a lifetime that's longer
than the lifetime of (at least some) domain names.

So I'm wary of using URLs in PEP or in feature negotiation
as a way of identifying content types and features. It's not
that it is unworkable, but the issue needs to be addressed.

Received on Tuesday, 13 May 1997 10:31:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:20 UTC