RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases

Harry Halpin wrote:
> We'd like to see this as an IETF-approved part of HTTP. 
> Reviving Nottingham's draft would solve a big problem for us. 
> In order for authors of documents on the Web to tell agents 
> that there is a transform to get data out of their data, they 
> need a link to the transform and the ability for the agent to 
> tell that link is actually not just an ordinary link, but the 
> link of a GRDDL transform. This is absolutely needed for the 
> cases where the document owner may want to authorize to the 
> transformation, but may not want to add the information to 
> the header of
> *every* document in the collection or have access to the 
> document. A use-case given by Ian Davis of Talis has been 
> written in more detail [2].

Why don't you just create a new HTTP header and register it? The effort
to register a new HTTP header would be the same as the effort to
register a new link relation for the "Link:" header. Plus, you wouldn't
have to wait for "Link:" to become standardized.

- Brian