Re: Initial feedback on the well-known URI Proposal

On Mar 7, 2012, at 3:12 AM, Rigo Wenning wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 March 2012 02:34:58 Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>> you're contradicting the entire P3P WG here:
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/P3P11/#ref_file
>> 
>> I must be doing something right.
> 
> Sorry this was a double negative here from my side. You're reproducing the P3P 
> WG here. And my aim is not to make the same mistakes again.

The two have almost nothing in common.  The examples provided
in the TPE spec are as complex as this function can get.

...

>> All of the major web servers have support for URI rewriting based on
>> prefix and regular expressions, and they are fully capable of rewriting
>> 
>>    /.well-known/dnt/my/path
>> to
>>    /my/path,tracking-status
> 
> IBM said in 2002 that this would be far to expensive for the server in terms 
> of computing. 

Well, I wrote IBM's server, and I am happy to say they are wrong.

>> if a site really wants to have a separate policy per resource delegated
>> directly to the resource owner's space.
> 
> But then you have the same as the header but you added another round trip.

Two, actually, but I am not worried about it because the tracking
status is not transferred on every response (unlike the current
header proposal).

....Roy

Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 12:18:51 UTC