- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:44:57 +1100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
What's <ref> here? I still don't see where the decision is made... at worst, this makes it seem like consumers can make an arbitrary decision as to whether to process a link with an anchor. This is where I am now: Links with the anchor parameter MUST be ignored by consuming implementations, unless their use is explicitly specified. On 19/02/2010, at 8:31 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 19.02.2010 03:03, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> OLD: >> The anchor parameter MUST be ignored by consuming implementations, unless its use is specified by the application in use. >> >> NEW: >> Links with the anchor parameter MUST be ignored by consuming implementations, unless its use is specified by the application and/or relation type in use. >> >> works? > > That's better, in that it clarifies that the anchor parameter never ever can be ignored. > > However, it still delegates the decision to the "fuzzy" term "application" or the relation type registration (why would that be involved?). > > How about: > > "The presence of the anchor parameter affects the context IRI. Thus, consumers either MUST ignore all links that include the anchor parameter, or process it according to <ref>. In the latter case, the resulting context IRI can identify an entirely different resource, in which case consumers MAY choose to ignore the link." > > Best regards, Julian > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 26 February 2010 04:45:35 UTC