- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 19:36:54 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@acm.org>
- Cc: koen@win.tue.nl, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Graham Klyne: > > >Isn't there a conflict here with <draft-mutz-http-attributes-02.txt>? There probably is, the draft-mutz-http-attributes drafts do not reflect the syntax rules in the latest TCN draft, but this will be fixed eventually. [...] >OK -- I accept that an alias mechanism is probably not a Good Idea. > >I think your comment suggests a possible requirement on a generic >negotiation framework is the ability to treat some set of features as >interchangeable in the context of some specific negotiation exchange, as >your 'fpred-bag' does for indicating the quality of a variant. Yes, any sufficiently generic framework would have to be able to treat features as interchangeable. This would even have to be done if the alias problem were absent. For example, for a document which will use animated gifs if java is not present, the `java' and `animated gif' features are interchangeable. >GK. Koen.
Received on Saturday, 19 July 1997 10:43:35 UTC