Message-Id: <199903191320.OAA16783@www45.inria.fr> To: "Michael A. Dolan" <email@example.com> cc: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Philipp Hoschka <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 14:20:07 +0100 Subject: Re: HTTP server driven content negotiation On 07/03/1999, "Michael A. Dolan" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >When making content-based system profiles, it would be handy to tag >broadcast content. > >As best as I can tell, CC/PP and the IETF conneg work is not suitable since >it requires the client to first describe its profile (which cannot >generally be done in TV). I think both of these are basically methods to write device descriptions. They do not define protocols, and thus do not require that the client describes its profile. I would thus propose to tag the content with the description of the device it is intended for. Looking at it from that angle, both CC/PP and conneg seem applicable to this particular problem. Note that at least in the case of CC/PP, the device description can be replaced by a URI pointing to a location where the description is stored. The intent is to avoid sending around lengthy device descriptions. In many cases, this URI can be considered as an identifier only, i.e. there's no need to actually downlad the description - the description is "hard-wired" into the receiving device.