- From: Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>
- Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:09:34 -0700
- To: "Lars G. Svensson" <lars.svensson@web.de>, public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <ad32cf63-d15a-1484-60d2-58188d4a75d6@lbl.gov>
I'm referring to what are currently termed the "QSA Functional Profile" and the "QSA Alternate Keywords Functional Profile". And I see that the conformance info has been moved to section 7.2. On 9/25/19 11:48 AM, Lars G. Svensson wrote: > I have the impression that we're not looking at the same document: In > the current ED there is no §2.1 since that content has moved to §7... > > I also don't understand where you see two similar QSA approaches. > > And I fully agree that not all web developers agree that query string > negotiation is the best way of doing negotiation. We also don't mandate > that (just as we don't mandate the use of http negotiation). QSA is one > way of doing it. If a web developer wants to implement profile > negotiation without query strings, she is free to do that. But if she > does it with query strings, we want to keep that interoperable, and > that's why we say "this is the way to do it". So we're in full agreement > "that there are many ways in which one can use the abstract model to > code up a content negotiation strategy and the QSA approach offers one > of them." Can you point me (and Nick and Rob) to text passages that > claim differently and preferably also propose text that resolves your > issue? > > Thanks, > > Lars > > Am 25.09.2019 um 20:03 schrieb Annette Greiner: >> The issue about whether that section is normative needs to be resolved >> for me to support moving to CR. It's particularly troubling to me >> since I did rewrite that section to address that, the changes were >> accepted, and then they were somehow edited back out by subsequent >> work. I realize the editing process can be chaotic with many >> contributors, so I'm not looking to blame anyone for this. My goal had >> been and remains to clarify that there are many ways in which one can >> use the abstract model to code up a content negotiation strategy and >> the QSA approach offers one of them. Since that rewrite, the document >> now offers two similar QSA-based approaches and a statement in section >> 2.1 that conformance to one of them or to header-based conneg is >> required for conformance to the spec. That isn't what we agreed to. My >> main concern with this is to acknowledge that web developers do not >> all agree that query strings are the best way to handle >> differentiating requests, and I don't think that we should be in the >> position of legislating development styles. >> -Annette >> >> On 9/25/19 10:05 AM, lars.svensson@web.de wrote: >>> Dear all, >>> >>> Thanks for giving us editors of conneg-by-ap another 24 hours to fix >>> open issues with the document. We have addressed the following: >>> >>> 1. The syntax for Accept-Profile now uses angle brackets around the >>> URIs in order to cleanly separate the profile URI from q-values, >>> other parameters or other profile URIs [0,1]. This resolves Rob >>> Sanderson's first objection. A question has been sent to Rob if he is >>> satisfied with the outcome [2] and he has confirmed this [3]. >>> 2. The three issues that were still in the document have been removed >>> since they were either closed already (#1041) or had been resolved >>> but not closed (#290) or resolved but without any response from the >>> original poster over four weeks (#678). This resolves Rob Sanderson's >>> second objection. A question has been sent to Rob if he is satisfied >>> with the outcome [2] and he has confirmed this [3]. >>> 3. The document now contains a definition of "functional profile" in >>> the definition section [4] while all other text about functional >>> profiles is now in its own section in §7 [5,6]. This resolves #1022 >>> [7]. >>> >>> What we have not been able to address is the question about order of >>> precedence for conflicting profile negotiation situations (#505)[8]. >>> My understanding is that Annette requires that QSA is made >>> non-normative while Nick and Rob are not willing to step down from a >>> full standard. I have asked Annette if this issue is a blocker for >>> her [8]. >>> >>> Regarding wide review, Peter had sent out a request for comments on >>> the 2PWD [9]. Following that, we've had responses on the comments >>> list and outside Github comments from at least Kam Hay Fung >>> [10,11,17], Erik Wilde [12], Herbert van der Sompel [13], Andreas >>> Kuckartz [14] and Gregg Kellogg [15, resolved in 16]. Following a >>> request from Nick [18], we also had feedback from CKAN developers >>> [19,20]. This shows involvement of the outside community. I have also >>> added this to the transition request document [21]. >>> >>> With five hours left, there is little left for us editors to do, >>> except to ask you to cast your votes again. >>> >>> The editors of conneg-by-ap >>> >>> Nick, Rob and Lars >>> >>> [0] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/conneg-by-ap/#http-getresourcebyprofile >>> [1] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/conneg-by-ap/#eg-http-get >>> [2] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Sep/0914.html >>> [3] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Sep/0915.html >>> [4] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/conneg-by-ap/#definitions and >>> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/larsgsvensson-functional-specification/conneg-by-ap/index.html#definitions >>> >>> [5] >>> https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/conneg-by-ap/#functional-profiles-definition >>> [6] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/conneg-by-ap/#conformance-profiles >>> [7] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1022 >>> [8] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Sep/att-0913/00-part >>> >>> [9] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-comments/2019May/0002.html >>> >>> [10] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/785 >>> [11] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/835 >>> [12] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/501#issuecomment-522503214 >>> [13] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/501#issuecomment-522523315 >>> [14] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/290#issuecomment-466656384 >>> [15] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/662 >>> [16] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-comments/2019Apr/0001.html >>> >>> [17] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-comments/2018Aug/0002.html >>> >>> [18] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Sep/att-0907/00-part >>> >>> [19] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Sep/att-0908/00-part >>> >>> [20] >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Sep/att-0910/00-part >>> >>> [21] >>> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/wiki/Conneg:-Draft-Transition-Request-to-CR >>> >>> -- Annette Greiner (she) NERSC Data and Analytics Services Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2019 19:10:04 UTC