Re: [Last-Call] [httpapi] Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpapi-rfc7807bis-04.txt> (Problem Details for HTTP APIs) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



hello carsten.

thanks for your review!

On 2022-11-02 22:32, Carsten Bormann wrote:
# Major:

There seems to be an expectation that IANA will make
https://iana.org/assignments/http-problem-types#foo resolvable.
I'm not sure IANA is in a position to do this today.

there is no such expectation, but i think i understand where you're coming from. on the one hand, we (hopefully) make it clear that "type" URIs should be used as identifiers and should not be dereferenced automatically.

on the other hand, we recommend that locator-type URIs should be resolvable. so while our recommendation/option to use https://iana.org/assignments/http-problem-types# as prefix for registered types is technically ok even when those URIs do not dereference, we're not following our own recommendation.

but it could be argued that even though https://iana.org/assignments/http-problem-types#foo may not dereference (because i think IANA is not in a position to manage fragment identifiers for registry pages), at least you'd end up on the registry page where finding the right entry is an easy thing to do. do you think that's good enough or do you think that not properly managing fragment identifiers is a problem?

thanks and cheers,

dret.

--
Erik Wilde | mailto:erik.wilde@xxxxxxxx    |
           | https://youtube.com/ErikWilde |

--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux