NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Eizi, The idea of using the MIME parameters is a new one and I don't think anyone has thought through the details yet. In particular, I too am confused by the introduction of yet another way to pass parameters. However, the need for a mime type to characterize the CF-netCDF encoding extension to WCS is well established. For now, I agree with you that the important thing is to start the process of deciding on and establishing what that should be. Your suggestion seems to be a sound one to me. We can start with application/x-cf-netcdf and apply for official registration of application/cf-netcdf. But, of course, the opinion of the CF community is the deciding factor. -- Ben On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Eizi TOYODA <toyoda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Ben, Firstly, thank you very much for quoting. However, to be honest, I don't get the point because of ambiguity: Are the MIME parameters used for data format? Or MIME parameters indicate the same thing what KVP is used for? Either makes sense but I don't think "it is how most of the web negotiates formats". In HTTP a client indicates a list of acceptable media types, and the server choses the best one according to priority (q parameter) given by the client. For example, a HTTP request shown below means "The best is HTML or XHTML, XML is fine. Give me anything if nothing above is available." GET /path/progname.cgi?key=value&key2=value2 HTTP/1.1 Host: server.domain Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 That is negotiation. Anyway, it is very good to know the proposal doesn't care whether the MIME type is a registered with IANA. Why don't we start with something like application/x-cf-netcdf or parameterized counterpart?
galeon archives: