[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MARMOTTA-77?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13937646#comment-13937646
]
Sebastian Schaffert edited comment on MARMOTTA-77 at 3/17/14 10:39 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
an option to solve this issue is to make use of the RestEasy content
negotiation classes, see
http://docs.jboss.org/resteasy/docs/3.0.6.Final/javadocs/org/jboss/resteasy/core/request/ServerDrivenNegotiation.html
and
http://docs.jboss.org/resteasy/docs/3.0.6.Final/javadocs/org/jboss/resteasy/core/request/AcceptHeaders.html
was (Author: wastl):
an option to solve this issue is to make use of the RestEasy content
negotiation classes, see
http://docs.jboss.org/resteasy/docs/3.0.6.Final/javadocs/org/jboss/resteasy/core/request/AcceptHeaders.html
> Implement RFC2296 Content Negotiation
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: MARMOTTA-77
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MARMOTTA-77
> Project: Marmotta
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Platform, Web Services
> Affects Versions: 3.1-incubating
> Reporter: Sebastian Schaffert
> Assignee: Sebastian Schaffert
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.3
>
>
> The content negotiation in LMFHttpUtils is currently simplified as it takes
> the first matching content type of the accept header. We should instead more
> closely follow the RFC2296 and RFC2295:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2296
> and
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2295
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
