10:53:14 RRSAgent has joined #dxwg 10:53:18 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/09/20-dxwg-irc 10:53:27 zakim, please start meeting 10:53:28 RRSAgent, make logs Public 10:53:29 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), LarsG 10:53:41 Meeting: DXWG CNEG Telecon 10:53:54 ScribeNick: LarsG 10:54:19 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2023.09.20 10:54:48 roba has joined #dxwg 10:56:21 present+ 10:58:59 present+ 10:59:52 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2023.09.20 11:00:42 YoucTagh has joined #dxwg 11:01:04 present+ 11:01:37 will have to leave in 45m 11:02:26 Topic: Admin 11:03:22 present+ 11:03:57 Subtopic: Approve last meeting's minutes 11:04:14 https://www.w3.org/2023/09/06-dxwg-minutes.html 11:04:34 Javier has joined #dxwg 11:04:36 Subtopic: Approve last meeting's minutes 11:04:41 +1 11:04:41 +1 11:04:44 +1 11:04:45 +0 11:05:04 RESOLVED: Minutes approved 11:05:22 TOPIC: Open actions from last meeting 11:05:30 https://www.w3.org/2023/09/06-dxwg-minutes#ActionSummary 11:05:55 roba: first action (access for Nick) has been resolved 11:06:31 https://github.com/w3c/dx-connegp/pull/49 11:06:36 ... Nick has made some pull requests 11:08:26 roba: https://www.w3.org/2023/09/06-dxwg-minutes#a02 (reactive, proactive cneg) 11:09:01 YoucTagh: Has updated issue 11:09:48 https://github.com/w3c/dx-connegp/issues/39 11:12:23 roba: behaviour is acceptable. If you ask for a profile 11:12:33 ... but the media type is noc available, you should 11:12:49 ... answer 406 (never return a media type the client 11:12:55 ... didn't ask for) 11:12:56 q+ 11:13:23 YoucTagh: media type is one of the dimensions in http 11:13:35 ... if the default representation does not have the 11:13:57 ... requested media type, we can specify that in the 11:14:15 ... link header, so the client would know that anyway. 11:14:53 ... If the server doesn't want to send a default representation 11:15:11 ... it would return 406 11:16:36 YoucTagh: In reacztive CNEG, the I-D specifies using HEAD to query for the 11:17:01 q- 11:17:17 ... supported profiles. That should be 300. 11:19:07 https://github.com/ProfileNegotiation/I-D-Profile-Negotiation/issues/28 11:21:26 roba: If a client uses HEAD without specifying a profile, 11:21:37 ... the server should answer with the default representation 11:21:49 ... including all headers 11:25:18 q+ 11:25:38 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html#section-9.3.2 11:25:55 YoucTagh: according to the spec, the response headers for GET 11:26:12 ... and HEAD need not be the same. 11:26:47 ack pchampin 11:27:29 pchampin: http semantics says that the answer to HEAD 11:27:50 .. request should be the same as for a GET (i. e. the headers) 11:28:07 s/should/SHOULD/ 11:28:23 ... that should go for the status code, too 11:28:46 roba: The question is if the server returns 200 or 406 for 11:28:58 ... a request for a header/profile combination it cannot 11:29:03 ... support 11:31:45 q+ 11:32:11 ... we need to make decision on that 11:32:16 ack pchampin 11:32:48 pchampin: it would be important to discuss this with the IETF group 11:35:39 ACTION: roba to word-smith a proposal for 200 vs 406 11:35:52 TOPIC: IEtF 11:36:13 pchampin: At TPAC there was a meeting with IETF people, 11:36:46 ... concerns that the ProfNeg spec is more IETF tha W3C 11:37:05 ... there are companion documents in IETF space 11:37:27 ... their advice would be send this to the http WG at IETF 11:37:50 q+ 11:37:56 q+ 11:38:17 ack roba 11:38:37 roba: sees the benefit of having the protocl side done in one place 11:39:06 ... W3C work includes an ontology with semantics 11:39:29 ... and the QSA side doesn't fit with IETF, either 11:40:29 ... the W3C work should refer to IETF docs, not duplicate them 11:40:42 ack LarsG 11:41:28 LarsG: have been working on this for 5 years with Rueben Verbourgh and Herbert van Soempel 11:41:49 ... were rejected by the IETF protocol working group - would be happy to recontact 11:42:46 ... main contacts Martin Thompson and Mark Nottingham from http WG 11:44:32 pchampin: large part of the spec is in W3C space, but the 11:44:45 ... protocol part should be IETF 11:45:01 LarsG: the I-D is at https://profilenegotiation.github.io/I-D-Profile-Negotiation/I-D-Profile-Negotiation.html 11:45:14 s/the/The proposed/ 11:46:03 ACTION: pchampin to contact Martin Tompson and Mark Nottingham in order to get a liaison 11:46:55 TOPIC: rest of actions... 11:47:42 roba: Action to prepare PR for #45 (https://www.w3.org/2023/09/06-dxwg-minutes#a04) is still open 11:48:33 YoucTagh: There is a branch for that 11:49:09 ... questions about some examples 11:49:26 roba: A 4.2 is just an example, shouldn't be in the same PR 11:51:18 YoucTagh: format(s) should be consistent with link hint spec (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-nottingham-link-hint-03#name-formats) 11:53:50 ... has updated references (how do we reference RFCs?) 11:54:10 ... will try just using RFC... 11:54:26 TOPIC: Open Pull Requests 11:55:12 roba: Nick has done a change to use JSON-LD at some places, too 11:55:26 ... we should be able to merge that 11:55:43 ... 11:55:59 ... merging that directly 11:56:31 ... PR #48 11:57:30 ... here Lars needs to review 11:57:58 ... and Nick make to changes requested by YoucTagh 12:01:59 roba: Won't attend next meeting 12:03:34 zakim, please end meeting 12:03:35 As of this point the attendees have been LarsG, pchampin, roba, YoucTagh 12:03:37 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 12:03:38 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/20-dxwg-minutes.html Zakim 12:03:45 I am happy to have been of service, LarsG; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 12:03:45 Zakim has left #dxwg 12:04:05 RRSAgent, please excuse us 12:04:05 I see 2 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2023/09/20-dxwg-actions.rdf : 12:04:05 ACTION: roba to word-smith a proposal for 200 vs 406 [1] 12:04:05 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2023/09/20-dxwg-irc#T11-35-39 12:04:05 ACTION: pchampin to contact Martin Tompson and Mark Nottingham in order to get a liaison [2] 12:04:05 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2023/09/20-dxwg-irc#T11-46-03