wdr:certifiesto provide such a standardised way of creating the certificate shown in section 6.2 of the current Description Resources draft. It was noted that the use of
wdr:certifiedByare independent of each other - i.e. using one does not entail using the other - although it's probably a good idea to do so. [Looking at the example now, it seems that
wdr:certifiesshouldn't be a property, rather it should be a sub Class of Descriptors]. This raised the issue of whether the grouping document should support definition of resources by reference to a hash of them so that a DR could indicate that it only applied to resources if they have remained unchanged. A proposal will be made to the group on this issue shortly (should we specify a limited number of hash types, such as with
wdr:sha-1or a more generic
wdr:hashwith a separate
wdr:hashAlgorithmpredicate?) The chair reported on the recent establishment of the HTTPBIS Working Group at the IETF and the statement in the charter: "The WG is not tasked with producing new methods, headers, or extension mechanisms, but may introduce new protocol elements if necessary as part of revising existing functionality which has proven to be problematic." On present evidence it seems unlikely therefore that the HTTP Link Header will be standardised although this working group would support such a move. The normative POWDER documents will not refer to usage of the HTTP Link header, however, informative documents will (because it's very useful and works!). The meeting closed with a realistic expectation of announcing Last Call on its Rec Track documents following the face to face meeting in Boston 8 - 9 November.
No Comments/Pingbacks for this post yet...