GRDDL Link header design alternatives (#issue-http-header-links)

Harry,

I gather you're exploring GRDDL link design options that
use only the already-registered Link: header field.

This won't work:

Link: <http://www.w3.org/2000/06/dc-extract/dc-extract.xsl>;
  rel="transformation";
  profile="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view"

The BNF in for Link[iana] doesn't have a profile param:
          Link           = "Link" ":" #("<" URI ">" *( ";" link-param )

          link-param     = ( ( "rel" "=" relationship )
                             | ( "rev" "=" relationship )
                             | ( "title" "=" quoted-string )
                             | ( "anchor" "=" <"> URI <"> )
                             | ( link-extension ) )

The "profile" term could match link-extension, but then we're back
to asking the IETF/IESG for an extension, and the Profile: header
proposal[mnot] is more mature than anything we'd make up now.

So I don't recommend re-opening the design discussion.

[mnot]
http://www.mnot.net/drafts/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-00.txt

[iana] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2068.html
which is cited from section 2.1.62.  Header field: Link of
HTTP Header Field Registrations December 2005
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4229.txt
which is the reference for Link in the permanent
header registry.
http://www.iana.org/assignments/message-headers/perm-headers.html
which was established by IETF consensus recorded in
Registration Procedures for Message Header Fields September 2004
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3864.txt

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Friday, 9 February 2007 17:30:33 UTC