Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types and link relation?
Erik Wilde <erik.wilde@dret.net> Sat, 02 January 2021 18:44 UTC
Return-Path: <erik.wilde@dret.net>
X-Original-To: httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E58CF3A0CDD for <httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 10:44:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id drnahxlYtPj8 for <httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 10:43:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from postoffice.gristmillmedia.com (dret.net [209.188.86.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8867F3A0CDB for <httpapi@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 10:43:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [108.205.51.24] (port=56957 helo=dretpro.attlocal.net) by postoffice.gristmillmedia.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <erik.wilde@dret.net>) id 1kvlsb-0006kQ-Mb; Sat, 02 Jan 2021 13:43:57 -0500
To: Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com>, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "httpapi@ietf.org" <httpapi@ietf.org>
References: <48058830-D096-4DBE-8476-0487544D880E@akamai.com> <e7e0e81b-0c84-a0d8-3ecc-bfc75f852e0a@dret.net> <CAOywMHfRWs=AcH3SKO9bUTMfrWGNOptsd_E4TOcctTJxH-EsiA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Wilde <erik.wilde@dret.net>
Message-ID: <49ff5ddf-da27-efe5-fa86-66860d2a72c3@dret.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2021 10:43:53 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOywMHfRWs=AcH3SKO9bUTMfrWGNOptsd_E4TOcctTJxH-EsiA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - postoffice.gristmillmedia.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - dret.net
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: postoffice.gristmillmedia.com: authenticated_id: birdhouse@dret.net
X-Authenticated-Sender: postoffice.gristmillmedia.com: birdhouse@dret.net
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/httpapi/aN4tbp23BuOuF0BwgKuyDFtCEB0>
Subject: Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types and link relation?
X-BeenThere: httpapi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Building Blocks for HTTP APIs <httpapi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/httpapi>, <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/httpapi/>
List-Post: <mailto:httpapi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpapi>, <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2021 18:44:01 -0000
hello all.
happy new year everybody!
On 2020-12-14 23:54, Herbert Van de Sompel wrote:
> I hope this clarifies the issue that was discussed in the recent WG
> meeting. And, like Erik, I hope the I-D can be adopted.
looking at the minutes it seems that generally speaking, the group was
ok with adopting the draft. the only question being raised was by alexey
melnikov about possible overlaps with CoRE.
herbert was nice enough to post the summary of our considerations when
we looked at CoRE at the very beginning of the linkset work. CoRE does
look similar (and it is), but we decided that the approach wasn't
matching our needs.
unless alexey (or anybody else) is asking for clarifications or a more
detailed discussion, i think we have addressed the one outstanding issue
that was identified in the IETF 109 meeting.
can we move forward with a formal request for adoption? this work is
already used in implementations out there (including the very major
scenario of GS1 as presented by phil archer), so our goal is to move it
forward.
thanks a lot and cheers,
dret.
--
erik wilde | mailto:erik.wilde@dret.net |
| http://dret.net/netdret |
| http://twitter.com/dret |
- [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types and… Salz, Rich
- Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types… Erik Wilde
- Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types… Herbert Van de Sompel
- Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types… Erik Wilde
- Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types… Salz, Rich
- Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types… Erik Wilde
- Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types… Salz, Rich
- Re: [httpapi] Should we adopt linkset media types… Erik Wilde