Re: [core] Base-URI Re: [Cbor] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-core-problem-details

[Christian Amsüss <[e-mail]>]

> Exactly (after s/URIs/URI references/).  
> So resolving the instance URI reference is not enough; preserving more of the context would be.

The changes currently in
https://github.com/core-wg/core-problem-details/pull/18 address my
concern here by the introduction of a base URI.

While I'd have preferred an outcome of removing the response code, and
making it up to the application to persist both response code and base
URI as a part of the context (which would make the road to CoRAL both
smoother and more interesting to users), this is satisfactory, and does
not limit the scope of what we can do later in a CoRAL based version.

> There probably should be a general means for preserving a base URI
> with a stored (or otherwise uprooted) representation of response
> content (think file-magic…).

Yes, and I've taken this up for exploration at
https://github.com/core-wg/coral/issues/27.

> Let’s discuss this today.

See you there
c

-- 
Beware paths which narrow future possibilities. Such paths divert you from infinity into lethal traps.
  -- Leto Atreides II