W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-media-types@w3.org > January 2005

ACTION 2005-01-06 Umit to respond to Henry

From: Yalcinalp, Umit <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:13:01 +0100
Message-ID: <99CA63DD941EDC4EBA897048D9B0061D0F676E2A@uspalx20a.pal.sap.corp>
To: <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, <public-ws-media-types@w3.org>

Hi Henry, 

I am writing in response to the note/proposal you sent to the media
types mailing list [1] with respect to the media types document design
[2] on behalf of the WSD wg to resolve issue 272 [3] . 

We discussed your email in the wg and we are trying to understand the
details of your proposal wrt using notations. 

-- Could you be able to rework all the examples in the note [2] to
utilize notations to help us? We have several examples in the doc which
shows the relationships between contentType and expectedMediaType
attributes. We want to understand clearly how they would be  reworked
exactly with the notations, etc. This will really help us understanding
notations better.

-- You mentioned we would not need expectedMediaType attributes, and I
would like to understand how. Are you assuming that all
expectedMediaType usage will be designated by notations? I expect the
answer to the previous question to clarify this. 

-- It seems to me that we would have to devise a mapping between the
RFC2616 [4] Accept content header values that define the content model
for expectedMediaType attribute to URIs using notations. There are
several aspects of this problem that I am curious to understand how
notations will help:

(a)The current content model of expectedMediaType allows parameters
(such as charset) , parameter values, etc. Further it is a range of
values, i.e. "text/xml, text/html". It would really help us to see
Example 5 reworked to see how the values are going to be URIs. Clearly
our definition of expectedMediaType is not a single value as in [5]. 

(b) Another example we would like to see with notations is when the
expectedMediaType in the Schema were to contain the value "text/*", and
the value of the contentType was "text/xml; charset=UTF16". I would
appreciate if your notation example could address this case. 

We are trying to understand your suggestion wrt notations better.
Therefore, additional examples/comparison with what we have and what you
are suggesting will definitely help us here.  

Thanks for your help in advance, 

--umit

[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-media-types/2004Nov/0011.h
tml
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-media-types/
[3]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/issues/wsd-issues.h
tml#x272
[4] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.html
[5] http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/

----------------------

Dr. Umit Yalcinalp
NetWeaver Standards
SAP Labs, LLC
3410 Hillview Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94304
umit.yalcinalp@sap.com
Tel: (650) 320-3095 
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2005 02:13:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:08:53 GMT