- From: Marja-Riitta Koivunen <marja@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 19:35:30 -0500
- To: "Barstow Art (NMP/Boston)" <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>, "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>, "'ext Matthew Wilson'" <matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: <www-annotation@w3.org>
You are right I should have tested Annotea Servlet too. After EricP's quick fix it seems to work now - thanks Eric! Marja At 05:16 PM 1/9/2002 -0500, Barstow Art (NMP/Boston) wrote: > > From: ext Marja-Riitta Koivunen [mailto:marja@w3.org] > > > The thread schema was not supposed to affect old clients, I > > did test with > > old Amaya. But obviously that was not enough. We should have > > asked someone > > else to test too. I have two names now on my list that we can > > ask next time. > >Marja - you should/could test schema or protocol changes with the >Annotea JavaScript interfaces: > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/Annotea/Bookmarklet/Annotea-JavaScript.html > > > Meanwhile we try see what is wrong and correct it as soon as possible. > >Hmmm. The Annotea Servlet? > >Jim - does your Annotea implementation use an Annotea Servlet like >[1] does or does it go directly to an Annotea Server? > >Matthew - at one point EricP was talking about modifying the Annotea >server (protocol?) so that Annozilla could bypass the Annotea Servlet >and go directly to the server. I don't know the status of that work. >I believe the issue was that Mozilla was expecting a different MIME >media >type for the RDF/XML returned from the server. Even if this current >problem is not related to the Annotea Servlet perhaps you and EricP >can determine a way to eliminate the servlet from the pipeline. > >Art >---
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2002 19:36:59 UTC