- From: Mike Schinkel <mikeschinkel@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 17:17:43 -0500
- To: "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@mnot.net>, "'Joe Gregorio'" <joe@bitworking.org>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote: > Your proposal puts the encoding information into the variable name. > That's one option, but I'm reluctant to encourage putting > this kind of thing in there, as it encourages URI Templates > to become URI Schemas, and they'll quickly become unreadable. > Encoding is by no means the last thing we'll want to > associate with a particular variable. Do you mind listing off what you are thinking of in terms of other things to associate? > In the past, I've proposed putting the information into the > documentation of a particular template type, rather than in > the template itself. You must have proposed that before I subscribed. Do you mind pointing to an example? > or b) has to have > template-specific knowledge somehow (internal database?), to > avoid overloading the templates with metadata. Internal to what? I'm not sure I understand. -- -Mike Schinkel http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ http://www.welldesignedurls.org/ P.S. I just want to repeat again how excited I am about this spec. It fills in what I see as one of the bigger holes in the lower level web specifications, and will make so many things possible that were previously not possible w/o violated "the rules." It's existence will really help as I move forward with http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
Received on Tuesday, 26 December 2006 22:17:55 UTC