 |
 |
At Tue, 1 Jun 2010 19:16:36 -0400, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > > That's a pretty reasonable way to approach it, I like Erik's > thinking on this. Although I'm not sure if a content in a URL vs one > negotiated via HTTP headers are quite "entirely different" like Erik > says -- rather, it's a question of whether you intend to > identify/refer/link to a specific version/representation of the > document, or the overall document itself, no? Thanks, Jonathan. I seem to have written “quite different” rather than “entirely different”, but I agree that they are related, conceptually. They are just different resources as far as the web architecture is concerned. > I'd also note that in an open search description context, you don't > need/can't have a "free parameter" for this, because it's baked into > the opensearch URL template "type" parameter. It however would be > appropriate to apply an OpenSearch URL template fixed to type X, > which has a URL that has httpAccept=X in it, where the X is _not_ > parameterized in the OpenSearch Desc URL Template, it's just fixed. > > I'm curious how/whether Erik's analysis would apply to other HTTP > headers that SRU (at least 2.0?) also makes available as query > parameters too. Charset, encoding, language? I guess those are kind > of analagous, there are times where you do need to > refer/identify/link to a document in a very specific encoding, > charset, or language. Other times where you just want to identify > the overall document, and let content negotiation pick the > appropriate representation (which could (should?) be done by 3xx > redirecting to the specific appropriate representation with the > encoding, charset, language, and/or content type fixed into the URL > itself?). > > […] Accept-Encoding is a little strange. It is used for gzip or deflate compression, largely. I cannot imagine needing a link to a version that is gzipped. It is also hard to imagine why a link would want to specify the charset to be used, possibly overriding a client’s preference. If my browser says it can only supports UTF-8 or latin-1, it is probably telling the truth. best, Erik