Open Stack

On 12/01/2014 05:36 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
> 
> 
>> detail=concise is not a media type and looking at the grammar in the RFC it
>> wouldn’t be valid.
>> I think the grammar would allow for "application/json; detail=concise". See
>> the last line in the definition of the "media-range" nonterminal in the
>> grammar (copied below for convenience):
>> Accept         = "Accept" ":"
>>                         #( media-range [ accept-params ] )
>> media-range    = ( "*/*"
>>                         | ( type "/" "*" )
>>                         | ( type "/" subtype )
>>                         ) *( ";" parameter )
>>        accept-params  = ";" "q" "=" qvalue *( accept-extension )
>>        accept-extension = ";" token [ "=" ( token | quoted-string ) ]
>> The grammar does not define the "parameter" nonterminal but there is an
>> example in the same section that seems to suggest what it could look like:
>> Accept: text/*, text/html, text/html;level=1, */*
>> Shaunak
>> On Nov 26, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Everett Toews < everett.toews at RACKSPACE.COM >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 20, 2014, at 4:06 PM, Eoghan Glynn < eglynn at redhat.com > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> How about allowing the caller to specify what level of detail
>> they require via the Accept header?
>>
>> ▶ GET /<prefix>/<resource_name>
>> Accept: application/json; detail=concise
>>
>> "The Accept request-header field can be used to specify certain media types
>> which are acceptable for the response.” [1]
>>
>> detail=concise is not a media type and looking at the grammar in the RFC it
>> wouldn’t be valid. It’s not appropriate for the Accept header.
> 
> Well it's not a media type for sure, as it's intended to be an
> "accept-extension".
> 
> (which is allowed by the spec to be specified in the Accept header,
>  in addition to media types & q-values)

Please lets not use the Accept field for this. It doesn't really fit
into the philosophy of content negotiation.

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net