Ralf, thanks for clarifying the HTTP semantics for the fragments.
That semantics makes sense I think, as the whole document needs to be
retrieved anyway.
Cheers, Andre.
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Ralf Nyren
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 07:46:36 +0200, Andre Merzky
wrote: One could also link the normative documents for the extension at http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure#specification; one could verify the #target elements; etc. However, that is as of yet unspecified AFAICS, and is likely a rather naive proposal, given my somewhat limited knowledge of HTTP itself.
There is a little problem with the fragment part of the URI, i.e. the #xxxx. According to the RFCs it is not part of the URL sent to the HTTP server. It is something that the client has to handle by itself.
For example: - Clicking on the http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/infrastructure#compute URL in your favorite browser will yield an HTTP request as follows: GET /occi/infrastructure HTTP/1.1
- In other words the _whole_ infrastructure "document" will be retrieved. The client (in this case your browser) will attempt to translate the #compute part into something useful with regard to the content-type of the document received. In case of text/html it is to jump to the fragment marker in the document. - How to handle the URL fragments in a future OCCI schema definition must be defined together with the format. However it is still the client which has to do the processing.
regards, Ralf
-- So much time, so little to do... [Garfield]