- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 02:03:59 -0800
- To: Jim Whitehead <ejw@rome.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- cc: w3c-dist-auth@www10.w3.org
While it is okay to choose not to use some attributes of the HTTP/1.1 description of Link, it is not okay to build a protocol that is incapable of using such links. For example, the light link proposal does not include a Title attribute, whereas we already know that a title is necessary for links to be presented in a human-readable menu. I think you will find that each of the attributes of Link are necessary for at least one system, and that some future systems will need attributes that we haven't thought of yet, so limiting the protocol to any notion of a minimal link is a mistake. Furthermore, it is totally unnecessary. The protocol can exchange lists of Link header fields just as easily as lists of triplets, and without the fear of becoming obsolete as soon as a new requirement is realized. ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 1997 05:06:46 UTC