W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > March 2011

Re: draft plan for moving forward on 200/303

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 15:27:34 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTin-HsM1F14jSePV6Pe3Jts6L=++X_KO0JZOTvbW@mail.gmail.com>
To: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
I plan to get started on this in a day or two, so let me know if you
have suggestions, either technical, stylistic, or political.

Jonathan

On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote:
> (Check out the new http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/57 ...)
>
> Here is a DRAFT of a proposal for a plan (etc.) for AWWSW work related
> to TAG ISSUE-57, based on recent discussions.
>
> We will prepare two products.
>
> 1. A background report giving the AWWSW TF's best description of the
>   issue, comprising
>   - brief history
>   - terminology and general analysis
>   - issues reported (deployment difficulty and performance problems
>       for httpRange-14 rule, mainly)
>   - enumeration and analysis of all plausible solutions known to the TF
>       ("plan B" solutions = {repeal of the rule + some way to refer
>        to an IR at a URI} being one set, "plan A" alternatives to 303
>        such as .well-known being another set)
>   - references
>
> 2. An illustration 'ontology' that would permit expression of both
>   opt-in and opt-out to the httpRange-14 rule.  The deliverable would
>   be two files, one of RDF and one of explanation and documentation.
>   This would be presented as *for discussion* - not ready for prime time.
>
> The purposes of the products would be to
> * supply a basis for further community discussion of what to do
> * help to recruit people to actively engage and to help out
> * explain to the TAG what the problem is
> * help the TAG decide how to further prosecute the issue (JAR suggested
>  rec track through TAG; Larry Masinter has suggested dropping it and
>  let the affected people run with it; that decision needs to be
>  informed)
>
> At the end, we present them to the community (including the TAG), then
> get back to what we were doing before.
>
> ----
> This is not the whole AWWSW story; we also wanted to deal with
> the rest of HTTP somehow - esp. 301/302/307, and maybe PUT.
>
> Jonathan
>
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 20:28:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 March 2011 20:28:08 GMT