- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:30:29 -0500
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:36 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > I think 'local policy' should be clarified to explicitly include content > negotiation. > Without this, the lines: > > [[ > each transformation indicated by any available namespace document, as in > the GRDDL for XML Namespaces section. > each transformation indicated by any XHTML profiles, as in the GRDDL for > HTML Profiles section. > ]] > http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-grddl-20070302/#sec_agt > > mean that a GRDDL aware agent, is required to get every representation > of a namespace doc, and a profile doc, to see whether they have any > GRDDL results. It could be _misread_ to say that, but it seems reasonably clear to me that content negotiation policy is part of local policy. We already cite WEBARCH, which discusses content negotiation. I'm inclined to say that's enough. > Suggested change. In the same block of the text change: > > [[ > may be guided by the agent's capabilities, local security policies and > possibly user/client intervention > ]] > > to > > [[ > may be guided by the agent's capabilities, local security policies, > local content negotiation policies [RFC 2616] and possibly user/client > intervention > ]] > > with new normative ref to RFC 2616 > > > Jeremy > > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2007 05:30:32 UTC