Re: [apps-discuss] URI templates in Link header fields

Hi!

I've wanted something like this in the past, and I *thought* I had some code 
that accepted a template in a custom header field.  But on closer examination, I 
see that I passed a template in the body of a POST submission.

It's something I could see myself using if specified.

And +1 to Erik Wilde's comment: "it would be great to consolidate all of this so 
that tooling and implementations can rely on a robust spec".

#g
--

On 29/08/2016 09:42, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Hi there.
>
> RFC 5988, defining the HTTP Link header field, predates RFC 6570, defining URI
> templates.
>
> In the meantime, I heard of a few cases where people were trying to use
> templates in Link header fields (an obvious thing to do), and came up with hacks
> to do so with the existing Link header field.
>
> I'm tempted to work on a small spec that defines an experimental new header
> field, similar to Link but allowing templates.
>
> Is anybody aware of existing code trying to use templates in Link header fields?
> If so, please report over here (or in doubt send private email).
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>