RE: Interest in HTTP Problem RDF Internet Draft?

On 30 Okt 2015 at 14:19, Dietrich Schulten wrote: 
> our discussion about the http-problem internet draft[1], ended with
> Markus' statement that "If [http-problem] will be widely adopted, we
> still have the luxury to be able to change Hydra".
> 
> Apparently IETF has earlier pointed Melvin Carvalho to http-problem as a
> possible solution response format for an HTTP 402 Payment Required
> status code [4].

Who is "the IETF" in this case?


> Anyway, our discussion has continued off-list and finally Erik Wilde has
> started an I-D http-problem-rdf at [2]. I wanted to inform the group
> about it, in case someone is interested.

Thanks!


> The purpose of the I-D is basically the same as that of the http-problem
> draft: "This document defines a "problem
> detail" as a way to carry machine-readable details of errors in a HTTP
> response, to avoid the need to invent new error response formats for
> HTTP APIs" with the additional goal to make the semantics of the
> http-problem media types available for RDF based representations, too.
> 
> Now the question: would it be OK to use the *still empty* contrib
> mailing list public-hydra-contrib@w3.org for discussions? Or would the
> group even be more comfortable if discussions took place here?

Feel free to discuss it on this list. It's easy enough to mute a discussion in almost every mail client I'm aware of.


> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra/2015Sep/0044.html
> [2] https://github.com/dret/I-D/tree/master/http-problem-rdf
> [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra-contrib/
> [4] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments/2015Jun/0056.html


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Sunday, 1 November 2015 15:10:25 UTC