Re: Versions and configurations

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Version identifier in URL"
• Previous message: Keith Dawson: "Versions and configurations"
• Maybe in reply to: Keith Dawson: "Versions and configurations"
• Next in thread: Larry Masinter: "Re: Versions and configurations"

> Decorated URLs in the MKS style may suffice for the simple versioning
> needs. But I suspect we'll want to look at an additional HTTP method --
> call it SET_CONFIG -- to tell a server, "Now switch to serving the
> 'tables-no-frames' version of the pages."

HTTP already has ample mechanisms to deal with multiple configurations
of content. And the presumption must be that there is no _state_, so
the notion of "switching to" some usage perspective won't work.

You might want to look over the content negotiation parts of the
HTTP/1.1 spec from:

        http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/

I'm troubled by the 'decorate URL' style of version referencing, but
the alternatives ("add additional HTTP methods") seems worse. I
suppose if a version is something that you want to be able to talk
about, then it should have its own URL.

Larry

• Next message: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Version identifier in URL"
• Previous message: Keith Dawson: "Versions and configurations"
• Maybe in reply to: Keith Dawson: "Versions and configurations"
• Next in thread: Larry Masinter: "Re: Versions and configurations"