Re: [dxwg] Query string implementation of profile selection (#544)

I'm not sure why you're surfacing this old email. Initially I had 
interpreted the requirement for a fallback in our charter as using 
content negotiation to retrieve fallback representations of resources 
based on profiles. I understand that the charter was in fact calling for 
alternative mechanisms to do the negotiation.
-Annette

On 9/24/19 9:48 PM, Lars G. Svensson via GitHub wrote:
> @agreiner 
> [scripsit](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/544#issuecomment-474535369)
>
>> Our charter calls for development of content negotiation by profile. 
>> Nothing in that document suggests a requirement to offer a 
>> query-string-based specification for handling profiles. I see no 
>> reason to think that such a thing would even be implied by the 
>> charter, as there exists no prior standard for handling content 
>> negotiation with query strings. If such a thing is needed at all, it 
>> would make the most sense to develop it in the context of existing 
>> use cases of content negotiation, such as language and media type. 
>> Offering normative specifications for a query-string-based 
>> negotiation method is overreaching our charter.
>
> The conneg deliverable is [defined 
> as](https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/charter#normative) "An explanation of 
> how to implement the expected RFC and suitable fallback mechanisms as 
> discussed at the SDSVoc workshop." QSA is proposed as a fallback 
> mechanism, so I'd say it's definitely covered by the charter. That the 
> implementation description is normative doesn't say that you have to 
> implement it, only that _if_ you implement it, that is the 
> interoperable way of doing it.
>
-- 
Annette Greiner (she)
NERSC Data and Analytics Services
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2019 17:30:06 UTC