Ah! I see my mistake: I didn't realize that section -- {10.1.2.4} -- only
applied to full cost maps.
But since we've taken out the "OPTIONS" example, why not just say that for a
full cost-map, the "cost-type-names" capability can only have a single
entry? That is, replace that whole paragraph with just:
cost-type-names: The name of the one and only Cost Type returned by this
unfiltered cost-map service. Note that the value must be a JSON array
containing a single string.
Period. Anything more just creates confusion.
- Wendy Roome
From: Richard Alimi <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, July 19, 2013 23:27
To: Wendy Roome <[email protected]>
Cc: alto <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [alto] Cost-type names
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Wendy Roome <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Yes, now I remember that discussion. But isn't the current wording misleading?
> I think the server only returns an IRD with a 300 status if the client sends a
> GET request rather than a POST request.
The way I read RFC2616, the 300 status code can be returned for either a GET
or a POST.
We'd be happy to find a better wording. Do you have any suggestions?
Thanks,
Rich
>
> - Wendy
>
>
> From: Richard Alimi <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri, July 19, 2013 03:31
> To: Wendy Roome <[email protected]>
> Cc: alto <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [alto] Cost-type names
>
>>
>> If there is more than one Cost Type in this list,
>> then the ALTO Server SHOULD return an IRD to the client
>> to lead it towards the URIs for the corresponding Cost Maps.
>>
>> I don't understand what that means. Can anyone explain it?
>
> This means that the ALTO Server may respond with an Multiple Choices (300)
> status code with the body containing an IRD. If I recall correctly, the
> explicit statement about the HTTP 300 status code was removed after a
> discussion about there being too strong of a coupling between ALTO and the
> HTTP layers. I know the WG has gone back and forth over appropriate wording
> for this particular issue in the past.
>
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
