At 01:16 30/08/2010, [email protected] wrote:
>> protocol://authority/resource_type/resource_id[?key_value_pair[,...]]
I did of course mean to use "&" between the key-value pairs, not ",".
Diva I think is suggesting optional extra data beyond the grid name
and UUID, melanie I believe is suggesting anything added is
compulsory, and that the avatar display name is in that class (as I
think most people have also agreed) .
Either way, things and requirements can change, and there could
therefore be different "versions" of such URIs with and without some
later field. Hence my suggestion that it uses a flexible format
of key=value pairs and that we make clear what is expected or
required for any given resource_type, , and what is for helpful
additional information.
protocol://authority/resource_type/resource_id?key=value&...
Perhaps a bit more radical.... I even wonder if the resource_id
(and resource_type?) should be the same (i.e. all key=value
pairs). That way all sorts of CGI and web app lookups would be
possible without web server URL mapping.
protocol://authority/resource_type/?resource_uuid=UUID&key=value&...
protocol://authority/<root>?resource_type=type&resource_uuid=UUID&key=value&...
I assume some sensible <root> part of the URI would be needed and
others have noted that might help to differentiate incoming service
calls for this functionality on the web server component of the
OpenSim HTTP listener. E.g. <root> = id
While not wanting to open this up even more... hey why not.. its a
good discussion... it would seem that we are wanting a URN
(Universal Resource NAME) as we do not want to imply availability of
the identity/"name" at a given location. But I think Karen has
already been talking along these lines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Name
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
