Re: DXWG Conneg by Profile Issues 662 & 663

Hi Gregg,

Yes I think we understand that such a document – a primer – would be a good idea! Something to consider once we’ve completed the specification and we intend to.

Thanks,

Nick

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
Date: Tuesday, 30 April 2019 at 2:07 am
To: Nicholas Car <Nicholas.Car@csiro.au>
Cc: "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de>, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, public-dxwg-comments <public-dxwg-comments@w3.org>
Subject: Re: DXWG Conneg by Profile Issues 662 & 663

Thanks, Nick. I’m happy with your resolution. The draft looks quite interesting, but ultimately a best-practices “cook book” might be useful for developers, rather than requiring them to navigate the different options you lay out.

Gregg Kellogg
gregg@greggkellogg.net<mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>


On Apr 29, 2019, at 12:33 AM, Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park) <Nicholas.Car@csiro.au<mailto:Nicholas.Car@csiro.au>> wrote:

Hi Gregg,

Two of the Issues you raised for the DXWG conneg work are:


  *   https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/662 - Differentiate profile parameter and Accept-Profile header
  *   https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/663 - Justify the use of opaque URIs for profiles

I’ve just closed them both now since we’ve addressed them. Are you happy with the results? I did see you’d thumbs up’d one of them already!

We’ll be releasing the Second Public Working Draft of Conneg by Profile this week and it’s actually already accessible athttps://www.w3.org/TR/2019/WD-dx-prof-conneg-20190430/. Are the issues you originally raised now better addressed by this draft? Do you see any other issues?

Thanks,

Nick

Nicholas Car
Senior Experimental Scientist
CSIRO Land & Water
41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, QLD 4102, Australia
E nicholas.car@csiro.au<mailto:nicholas.car@csiro.au> M 0477 560 177 P 07 3833 5632