Re: Feedback on draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-body-02
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sun, 23 January 2022 21:58 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF4083A2C39 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:58:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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 n9DR5NGuSbAo for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:58:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (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 B04C63A2C3B for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:58:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1nBkpe-0006zt-1p for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 21:55:30 +0000
Resent-Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 21:55:30 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1nBkpe-0006zt-1p@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <cabo@tzi.org>) id 1nBkpc-0006yu-Ol for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 21:55:28 +0000
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de ([134.102.50.15]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <cabo@tzi.org>) id 1nBkpa-0002JW-Ua for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 21:55:28 +0000
Received: from smtpclient.apple (p5089a5d9.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.165.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Jhn3P3rbfzDCbt; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:55:13 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <1595be96-bcf5-8443-0b74-0b1d319399a2@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:55:12 +0100
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C483BAC8-665E-4529-8D31-150928AB584E@tzi.org>
References: <CO6PR06MB7556DEBED9156324B1BC8360E6509@CO6PR06MB7556.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <CO6PR06MB75567B02A53DEDDDCFE831BCE65A9@CO6PR06MB7556.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <1595be96-bcf5-8443-0b74-0b1d319399a2@gmx.de>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.40.0.1.81)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=134.102.50.15; envelope-from=cabo@tzi.org; helo=gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1nBkpa-0002JW-Ua 8b02d0488844f8977be4d265658c66fc
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Feedback on draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-body-02
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/C483BAC8-665E-4529-8D31-150928AB584E@tzi.org>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/39778
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
On 20. Jan 2022, at 09:22, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > >> Here is an potential example that uses the draft IETF JSONPath query >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base/ >> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base/>): > > I agree that more examples would be good. However, this would introduce > a dependency on a draft that is likely to be finished farer in the > future. Unless the example is normative and not just an example, I don’t think that this would get in the way. (And the jury is still out on the race between the two drafts. You did start earlier :-) > Maybe there's a simpler-but-standardized JSON query language Well, you could use RFC 6901 JSON Pointer. > that we can use (optimally with a defined media type…). Thanks for the reminder! Grüße, Carsten
- Feedback on draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-body… Slik, David
- Re: Feedback on draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-… Julian Reschke
- Re: Feedback on draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-… Julian Reschke
- Re: Feedback on draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-… Slik, David
- Re: Feedback on draft-ietf-httpbis-safe-method-w-… Carsten Bormann