Re: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-00.txt

> Sylvain Hellegouarch schrieb:
>> Both are fair points. I am still not convinced by the way
>> Entity-Tranform
>> is specified though. It seems over complicated. Why not defining the
>
> Well, that's why I was submitting a draft -- feedback is needed. I
> realize that Entity-Transform currently may violate the KISS principle,
> maybe I should go back to it's minimal form of...:
>
> Entity-Transform    = "Entity-Transform" ":" 1#transform-info
> transform-info      = "identity" | "unspecified"

+1

>
> ...and leave everything else to future specs.
>
>> Entity-Transform header has follow:
>>
>> Entity-Transform = "Entity-Transform" ":" media-type
>>
>> Thus taking benefit from the existing IANA registration for what you
>> call
>> token in your proposal of the header. At least in that case the
>> user-agent
>> would know precisely how the server has transformed the request entity
>> and
>> the impact of that extension would be minimum.
>
> Reusing media types sounds like a good idea, but I'm not sure how this
> is going to work. Could you give examples for some of the use cases
> mentioned in the document (XML Infoset preserved, HTML filtering, SVN
> keyword substitution, AtomPub...)?

Fair point. I had not thought this through. In that case I think your
above proposal is a good one.

- Sylvain