Re: Use of .well-known for CSV metadata: More harm than good

Hello David, Mark, others,

On 2015/06/19 16:32, David Booth wrote:

> On 06/19/2015 12:29 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:

>> And,
>> since the Web is so big, I certainly wouldn't rule out a collisions
>> where it *is* misinterpreted as metadata.
> It certainly is possible in theory that someone with a CSV resource at a
> particular URI could completely coincidentally and unintentionally
> create a JSON file with the exact name and exact contents -- including
> the URI of the CSV resource -- required to cause that JSON to be
> misinterpreted as metadata for the CSV file.  But it seems so unlikely
> that virtually any non-zero cost to prevent it would be a waste.

In general, I'm not as concerned with this issue as Mark, in particular 
for conventions that are local to a subdirectory. Also, when I read 
Mark's mail, I felt agreeing with David that this isn't really an issue, 
even if the Web is big.

But reading the "exact name" above, I have to say that it's very usual 
for a server to publish the same data with the same name (except maybe 
extension) in different forms (html, xml, json, rdf, csv,...). 
Frameworks such as Ruby on Rails have this capability built in.

 From that, it's not such big a step anymore to have cases where the 
JSON can be misinterpreted as metadata for the CSV, or where the use 
case of JSON for publishing the same data and the use case of JSON for 
metadata about CSV conflict.

Regards,   Martin.

Received on Friday, 19 June 2015 08:56:14 UTC