On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Richard Alimi <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Wendy Roome 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> First, if a server provides multiple IRDs, are cost-type names local to
>> each IRD? Or are they global to the set of IRDs? The examples define
>> cost-type names in both IRDs, which implies the names are local. But I
>> didn't see anything that said that.
>>
>
> Yes, they are local to an IRD.
>

... and we can double-check the draft to ensure it states this explicitly.


>
>
>>
>> Second, {10.1.2.4} has the following sentence under the description of
>> cost-type-names:
>>
>>     Since an unfiltered Cost Map is requested
>>     via an HTTP GET that accepts no input parameters,
>>     an ALTO Client MUST be led towards a resource
>>     that has a single element in the ¹cost-type-names¹ list.
>>
>>
>> I think that would be better expressed as
>>
>>     Since an unfiltered Cost Map is requested
>>     via an HTTP GET that accepts no input parameters,
>>     the 'cost-type-names' capability for that resource
>>     can only contain one element.
>>
>
> This change sounds good to me.
>
>
>>
>> That section also says:
>>
>>
>>     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.
>
>
>>
>>         - Wendy Roome
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> alto mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto

Reply via email to