- From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:38:37 -0400
- To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Hi Amos, --On June 20, 2015 at 12:16:47 PM +1200 Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote: > This is not about the existing application/xml mime type. Martin is > suggesting a new mime type. Such as application/xml+vtimestamp. > > The client would send the HTTP header Accept:*/xml+vtimestamp,*/xml and > the server return application/xml+vtimestamp where the XML has embeded > vtimestamps. That is not very practical in this case as we have three iCalendar media types (text/calendar, application/calendar+xml, application/calendar+json) in addition to the application/xml. > Another way to look at whether Prefer is appropriate is - what can HTTP > proxies or HTTP servers that support Prefer but not WebDAV do to meet > the preference ? > > In this case there is nothing. Since payload manipulation requires > WebDAV XML format knowledge. The Prefer spec says this: The Prefer header field is end to end and MUST be forwarded by a proxy if the request is forwarded unless Prefer is explicitly identified as being hop by hop using the Connection header field defined by [RFC7230], Section 6.1. Which implies that an end-to-end preference is just as valid a use case as a one where the proxy can intervene. -- Cyrus Daboo
Received on Saturday, 20 June 2015 00:39:16 UTC