Re: Change Proposal for HttpRange-14

On Mar 24, 2012, at 08:38, James Leigh wrote:

> On Sat, 2012-03-24 at 08:11 +0000, Jeni Tennison wrote:
>> Can I just cast that into the language used by the rest of the proposal? What about:
>> 
>>        when documentation is served with a 200 response from a probe
>>        URI and does not contain a 'describedby' statement, some agents 
>>        (including the publisher) might use it to identify the documentation
>>        and others a non-information resource. Publishers still need to 
>>        provide support for two distinct URIs if they want to enable more
>>        consistent use of the URI.
>> 
>> How does that sound?
>> 
> 
> I'd buy into that.

It works, but asks a lot from implementors and users to read and understand the subtlety.  That's why I'd prefer an approach that provides a more simple, unambiguous definition.

Regards,
Dave



> 
> Regards,
> James
> 
> 

Received on Sunday, 25 March 2012 18:02:46 UTC