Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure-00 for general structured data

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 23 December 2016 18:19 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 E4A1C129695 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 10:19:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 wFgnBH46XoVL for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 10:19:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA41512966F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 10:19:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cKUOo-000803-Kk for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:16:58 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:16:58 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cKUOo-000803-Kk@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1cKUOg-0007z7-BU for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:16:50 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1cKUOf-000740-JO for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:16:50 +0000
Received: from [10.0.0.44] (unknown [71.200.63.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4CBA22E25B; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:16:26 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <35e612ec-5452-2fd3-358d-5285bcb5225d@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:16:24 -0500
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Ian Clelland <iclelland@google.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@varnish-cache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <230C725C-1D6B-4E83-A9A4-A901BD4A0404@mnot.net>
References: <CAK_TSXLJcDkUCpn5f79DBtnGjjPLtb1fEv_-Akfg4cPbboFVvg@mail.gmail.com> <38632.1482431937@critter.freebsd.dk> <35e612ec-5452-2fd3-358d-5285bcb5225d@gmx.de>
To: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1cKUOf-000740-JO be17cc64fbff0523badeb2b774a16803
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure-00 for general structured data
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/230C725C-1D6B-4E83-A9A4-A901BD4A0404@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33242
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: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

> On 23 Dec. 2016, at 12:39 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> On 2016-12-22 19:38, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> --------
>> In message <CAK_TSXLJcDkUCpn5f79DBtnGjjPLtb1fEv_-Akfg4cPbboFVvg@mail.gmail.com>
>> , Ian Clelland writes:
>> 
>>> With JFV, I'd declare a policy with a header value like this:
>>> 
>>> {"feature1": ["http://origin1","http://origin2"]], "feature2": ["http://origin3", "http://origin4"], "feature3": []}
>> 
>>> Trying my best to shoehorn this structure into CS, I do notice that nothing
>>> in the grammar or the text says that duplicate identifiers in an
>>> <h1_element> aren't allowed, so I suppose I could write something like this:
>>> 
>>> >feature1;o="http://origin1";o="http://origin2",feature2;o="http://origin3";o="http://origin4",feature3<
>> 
>> That's how I would do it as well.
> 
> Using identical parameter names sounds like a bad idea; I'm not aware of any header field that currently uses this format, and it also seems to contradict the "dictionary" data model.

Link allows it, and IIRC some link relations take advantage of that (although I can't think of their names ATM).




--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/