Re: [vwrap] The <embed> tag... is the group still interested in LLSD or DSD?

Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com> Sat, 07 May 2011 15:25 UTC

Return-Path: <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B09DE06E6 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 May 2011 08:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.876
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.876 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SmCInCWE1PL9 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 May 2011 08:25:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0689E06BA for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 May 2011 08:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qwc23 with SMTP id 23so3020605qwc.31 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Sat, 07 May 2011 08:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=2A36RDdtp5ClkFRNhXBcCDSzgBkf+QPqAR8B8dFm+LQ=; b=ms7RmGciJh5Hct4SqbbYPiwkKGSen7So45Y1G/2JAmS/xUNdASVMpCWCRd3F2bkEYJ dVkVrFfdXq4z5XX8dXeHVdU7nMWqeDfaXvSrQToyOQfuF9ZAwKPMBegDg6pQ8l71ifyW E/OXqki+G6Vdfdn1wiZIR3Jbnku5XHpEXDyBM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=UpYOBxBXGBMMpfvn4D1pwskLqLf5RyBj9aCVEcICQ9TVJV5l0sxkzgS5cG0B8m8hvN 1T3Ma6kzfLXwTl3jhrCH/uN1wU5YmyBidLHUU0CPIpXOMWtiRYQs+QDp1woc0K1v1Hg0 uGhfveHPZuFCVqvvzjUmUvGOqVmhxalk7ZINY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.102.85 with SMTP id f21mr3559568qco.25.1304781939182; Sat, 07 May 2011 08:25:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.66.212 with HTTP; Sat, 7 May 2011 08:25:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim=9y4BcOVwoGEZhuNuCfqcKyZSbg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=g9T5q5bVgytpxRxuE=Oc9iG2F9w@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=K8-6oL-JJoPCfz0JjDpaRBpeOyg@mail.gmail.com> <4DC15504.3090503@gmail.com> <BANLkTikay4xhQoZs2L0uRLSXgUMfCE9yfA@mail.gmail.com> <4DC160F0.1030201@gmail.com> <BANLkTikTYpLHM=GAeGAVfufqZ5XT0FSAzw@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=kjBSuMjPcgfXTUvZ3iwmS1bN50Q@mail.gmail.com> <4DC17704.3020201@gmail.com> <BANLkTimpGpNrkE3WUdurduqrVumocDRwfQ@mail.gmail.com> <4DC1824B.6040609@gmail.com> <BANLkTi=hhsiDs=fdZRsthp_+5Hs+pR4L6A@mail.gmail.com> <4DC1956A.5020204@gmail.com> <BANLkTik8rnsKP4xq+Gj5G4dsG=UOVnkNSQ@mail.gmail.com> <4DC1A8C9.9090406@gmail.com> <BANLkTikkOS34CC+ML0JNJgHDoRqbs9rY9w@mail.gmail.com> <4DC1D165.7010705@gmail.com> <4DC1D5FC.6040608@gmail.com> <BANLkTik81Eht3NTdLXXmgqOWvjc2s_KBnw@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=-heHa35w43te0ba8NufkT+MP+CQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTin6ExR7+xpodbtoTAS_4WyhUXL92Q@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikjKib79_rLR_s2X=X-ss-+V_yw+w@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTim4aY7oNALbOfZ2V-htivVmQJZDiA@mail.gmail.com> <4DC45B56.1020604@gmail.com> <BANLkTim=9y4BcOVwoGEZhuNuCfqcKyZSbg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 16:25:39 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTinBSVMxCLhY6j8XVt39cM77_K1zPQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
To: vwrap@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=002354471a20fe8ba004a2b137b1
Subject: Re: [vwrap] The <embed> tag... is the group still interested in LLSD or DSD?
X-BeenThere: vwrap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual World Region Agent Protocol - IETF working group <vwrap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap>
List-Post: <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 15:25:44 -0000

We will certainly need to have a protocol negotiation handshake if we have
any pretentions of being "extensible", and this negotiation phase needs to
be present in all serializations, including binary ones.  Carlo's advice
about this is good.

Version 1.0 for VWRAP needs to be as good as we can make it though, not the
current LLSD spec which is clearly very limited.  Knowingly keeping it
inferior and immediately creating problems for everybody is a very poor way
to proceed.

I recommend that if you want LLSD/DSD unchanged from its current spec then
you should publish it as an RFC, and avoid all these discussions.  Here in
VWRAP we have a far more onerous duty, which is to publish a *good* types
spec.


Morgaine.




====================

On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Meadhbh Hamrick <ohmeadhbh@gmail.com>; wrote:

> or... you could simply add a version tag to the contents of the LLSD.
> so, an XML LLSD blob might look like:
>
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <llsd>
>  <version>2</version>
>  ...
> </llsd>
>
> and a json blob might look like
> {
>  version: 2,
>  ...
> }
>
> (though this example would require us to make the version element in a
> map verboten.)
>
> --
> meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
> @OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * OhMeadhbh@gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com>; wrote:
> > On 05/06/2011 09:18 AM, Joshua Bell wrote:
> >>
> >> As far as adding new types: I believe there was the belief that this
> could
> >> be accommodated by defining an "LLSD2" at some point in the future with
> a
> >> distinct MIME type for serializations (e.g. application/llsd2+xml);
> unlike
> >> the Web, content negotiation over HTTP was assumed to be functional
> within
> >> VWRAP interoperation.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Or, Content-Type: application/llsd+1+xml
> > Or, Content-Type: application/llsd++xml
> > Or, Content-Type: xml-ietf-vwrap/llsd+adt+extra
> >
> > ...etc, would work yet I believe - and + still are transient denotations
> for
> > with or without DTD, so...
> >
> > Content-Type: xml-ietf-vwrap/urn:[bank]:llsd.proxy.net:map,abstract,...
> >
> > Yes, LLSD as-is continues to work even without excessive headers.
> >
> >
> > --
> > --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
> > Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > vwrap mailing list
> > vwrap@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
> >
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> vwrap@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>