- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:11:17 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Cc: "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > The heart of the issue is how policy is discovered; the current ED uses > a per-resource OPTIONS, while almost every other solution in this space > uses a well-known-location. robots.txt is a per-domain policy (to prevent a host from being overwhelmed); there are per-resource ways of controlling spiders as well. favicon.ico is a per-domain policy that is only available due to a legacy proprietary extension; it causes untold problems (e.g. it doubles the load on some of my sites due to bugs in how browsers cache 404 responses for this resource), and it has per-resource ways of being specified instead (including using HTTP headers). p3p.xml is a per-domain policy intended to be fetched before the resource in question is fetched, for reasons that don't apply here. There are also ways of providing per-resource information for this policy. Furthermore, P3P has had such a poor uptake that I don't think it's a good thing to look at. Sitemaps are site-specific (domain-specific) and are intended to act as a manifest for other resources, and thus wouldn't make sense at a per-resource level. None of these seem appropriate precedents for Access Control, which is specifically a per-resource concern. > The decision to Recommend a new mechanism for discovering policy > shouldn't be taken lightly. I hardly think that HTTP headers and "OPTIONS" can be called a "new mechanism". After all, every per-resource policy mechanism uses them already! HTTP authentication, caching policies, redirect policies, cookies, WebDAV, you name it. They are the most appropriate mechanism for declaring per-resource policies. > I've pointed out several problems with the current proposal, and haven't > received satisfactory responses to many of them. As far as I can tell, all feedback has been responded to -- can you be more specific as to what technical feedback hasn't been answered? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 01:11:30 UTC