Re: [core] Report on first Resource Directory plugtest

[peter van der Stok <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

The extra-attrs* in the template has more consequence than I originally 
thought.
Apparently, it allows any query-parameter used in a given link to be 
used in the RD and given a value.
The consequence is that we do not have a resource directory but 
something more fine-grained: a query directory.
A user can specify a large number of queries with different values in a 
link specification.
The RD can then be queried for links with for example: 
nm="petervanderstok".

Don't we want to contain the possible query parameters that we allow in 
extra-attrs*.

An alternative is that exra-attrs* provides a list of the query 
parameters that are available for the link.

Peter
> 
> The good reason is that we are using URI templates in the registration
> update operation: {+location}{?lt,con,extra-attrs*}
> 
> While it should be intuitively obvious that for location="x://y/z?a=b"
> and lt="42", the produced URI is "x://y/z?a=b&lt=42", RFC6570 Section
> 3.2.8 does not describe peeking back at what has been expanded to the
> left side, but prescribes a "?" to be used before the first value, so
> the produced URI would be "x://y/z?a=b?lt=42" (or possibly ?a=b%3Flt=42
> but not ?a=b&lt=42).
> 
> If I'm reading RFC6570 wrong here, Location-Path can be allowed and I'd
> be happy.
> 
> Otherwise, we have to choose between using formal URI templates here
> (vs. saying that some query parameters can be appended) and allowing
> Location-Query. (Requiring anyone to understand ?foo=bar?baz=qux as two
> keyswould be madness so it's not an option.)
>