W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > April 2008

Re: URI Templates and Acceptable Values

From: Wilfred Springer <wilfredspringer@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 15:13:12 -0400
Message-ID: <4c75af00804030830i75727fa4h24a8f682064db1a0@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ben Ramsey" <benramsey.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: URI <uri@w3.org>
Hi Ben,

(Even though I have been subscribed to this list for ages, I haven't kept
track of all of the discussions, so I can't help you directly.)

I also started to wonder about this today. The grammar suggests that you can
do something like this with all operators:


.... with val being the default value. Now the spec doesn't include any
examples doing this. I started to wonder what it would be like for the list


The spec is inconclusive on how the default value should be represented. But
since the list operator only accepts list type of variables, it must be a

I would say, we should either drop default values from the variable section
of the expansion expression, or introduce a way to represent list values.

Wilfred Springer

2008/3/10, Ben Ramsey <benramsey.lists@gmail.com>:
> I've combed through the list and can't find whether this has been
> previously discussed, so forgive me if I'm repeating something.
> I know that you can use a URI template to define a default value for a
> parameter (i.e. {foo=bar}), but has anyone discussed the use of a list of
> acceptable values for a parameter?
> Perhaps something like:
> {foo=[bar,baz,qux]}
> In this case, the only acceptable values for foo are bar, baz, and qux.
> Implementors would determine how to handle unacceptable values.
> If this has been discussed and decided against, what was the reasoning for
> rejecting this idea?
> --
> Ben Ramsey
> http://benramsey.com/
Received on Sunday, 6 April 2008 19:13:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:12 UTC