Re: HTTP 2.0 (was Re: Last Call: draft-nottingham-http-link-header (Web Linking) to Proposed Standard)

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Fri, 25 September 2009 11:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95CB63A686E for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:41:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.569
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yaU1QUQhZnTR for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B8E3A6861 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Mr9Bc-0006Nk-KF for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:42:04 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1Mr9BV-0006M9-Gj for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:41:57 +0000
Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1Mr9BM-00088d-9s for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:41:57 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2009 11:41:17 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.117]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp071) with SMTP; 25 Sep 2009 13:41:17 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19nIn88oFFntj1Vk1RPBgbbJ4JrUChQM56a4lMBv/ L8NCIb+4P2IjFI
Message-ID: <4ABCAC52.9040909@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:41:06 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060516 Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>
CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
References: <21606dcf0909250432q7026616du456ed594aeb0aafa@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <21606dcf0909250432q7026616du456ed594aeb0aafa@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.5600000000000001
Received-SPF: pass
X-SPF-Guess: pass
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Mr9BM-00088d-9s 370ee8c1b006ef88839ff7d516e69c4d
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP 2.0 (was Re: Last Call: draft-nottingham-http-link-header (Web Linking) to Proposed Standard)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4ABCAC52.9040909@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/7766
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Mr9Bc-0006Nk-KF@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:42:04 +0000

Sam Johnston wrote:
> ...
> The link header could already make a huge difference to the way the web 
> works (I've already started on this with 
> draft-johnston-addressing-link-relations 
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-johnston-addressing-link-relations>), 
> but we're lacking the LINK and UNLINK verbs that HTTP originally defined 
> for managing them. Similarly, people often run into problems using 
> PUT/POST for requests that should have been handled by PATCH (which was 
> also [poorly] specified and then abandoned). Encodings are yet another 
> issue I'm increasingly coming up against for non-ASCII characters. "HTTP 
 > ...

We don't need HTTP 2.0 to define LINK, UNLINK or PATCH (the latter being 
defined in draft-dusseault-http-patch-14 which is progressing REALLY 
slowly).

> as a meta-model" would also benefit from categories (which I have 
> already transplanted from Atom in draft-johnston-http-category-header 
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-johnston-http-category-header>). Oh 
> and let's not forget about pulling in the MOVE and COPY verbs from 
> WebDAV so we can instruct servers to migrate resources (e.g. push a VM 
> from one cloud to another).

What stops you from doing this right now?

> ...
> Another significant pain point for me (and apparently others) is 
> collections. URLs should be able to return multiple resources headers 
> and all, without having to resort to add-ons like multipart MIME. That 
> way I could ask for, say, all of the contacts in my mail account and 
> have them rendered as vCard but with metadata like author and security 
> information, web linking to other contacts (eg FOAF), web categories, 
> etc. Presumably this would be relatively easy to do by tweaking the spec 
> (e.g. using CRLF separators between resources) but today I'm having to 
> use hacks like text/uri-list which have O(n+1) rather than O(1) 
> performance, or resorting to formats like Atom for this special case.
> ...

WebDAV (RFC4918) defines collections, and ways to get information about 
multiple resources at once.

> ...

BR, Julian