Re: [dxwg] A short token to specify a profile may be used as long as there is a discoverable mapping from it to the profile's identifying URI [ID5] (5.5) (#290)

client may or may not know the token or what it means - thats a different architectural question for each implementation we can only address by specifying how they could find out.

The token mapping exists is for three main reasons:
1) it allows us to characterize existing systems that use a token to identify a profile - in general that is how the most common and trivial case of negotiation ("i want this one") is handled in many systems that offer different representations of things. (all they have to do is provide a means to list profiles and tokens - i.e. canonical form of documentation about what such tokens mean) - this is actually the whole motivating Use Case for all the participants planning to implement conneg, and why we need the profiles ontology to offer an out-of-band implementation of list profiles.
2) It makes for clarity when a human finds links that specify a particular profile to access
3) it allows us to provide a pathway towards use of URIs as dereferencable identifiers

So, yes URIs have primacy as unambiguous option, but we are seeking a way to retrofit them with minimal pain.

The guidance document could usefully cover this and other usage patterns. From the conneg perspective this is an identified requirement that has been met, and can go out for review for specific feedback.  Feel free to open a new and conneg-specific issue if you want to propose an improvement in wording - or point out a specific flaw - but this issue was about meeting the requirement in the proposed text, and that has been done. 

(in general this is why i have voted to restart the guidance doc - i think these questions about understanding how various current practices map onto formalisms live there in general - leaving specs clean as possible. )





-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/290#issuecomment-525537942 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2019 00:49:08 UTC