W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > February 2009

Re: HTTP "related protocols?"

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 08:12:46 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2r62djacx.fsf@nwalsh.com>
"Florent Georges" <fgeorges@fgeorges.org> writes:

>   Hi,
>
>   In the note in <http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc/#cv.request> in the
> current CR from late November, one can read:
>
>     In the case of simple "GET" requests, implementors are encouraged
>     to support as many protocols as practical. In particular, pipeline
>     authors may attempt to use p:http-request to load documents with
>     computed URIs using the file: scheme.
>
>   It sounds quite weird to me.  What does GET mean for another
> protocol than HTTP?  In the same way, the first sentence in §7.1.10,
> p:http-request says "The p:http-request step provides for interaction
> with resources over HTTP or related protocols."  What is a "related
> protocol?"  I can understand HTTPS, but which other one?

In addition to file:, which is overloading things a bit, and https:
there are a whole bunch of protocols that are essentially HTTP under
the covers. Some of these are application and vendor specific, few (if
any) are standardized. I'm thinking of ical:, I've seen several
references to webdav:, etc.

The idea is that if one or more of these takes off, it's perfectly
reasonable for p:http-request to "do the right thing".

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | All our foes are mortal.--Paul Valéry
http://nwalsh.com/            | 

Received on Thursday, 5 February 2009 13:13:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 5 February 2009 13:13:26 GMT