Hi Maarten, That's a good point. We see this with other media type parameters too, such as when clients tack on the charset parameter but servers do not yet everything just works. And we have received some implementation feedback suggesting that changing the content-type header is not easy in some server frameworks. Consequently, we have an issue in the tracker about this [1], and I have noted your suggestion to drop the requirement completely.
-andy [1] https://github.com/anewton1998/draft-regext-ext-json-media-type/issues/42 On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 4:41 AM Maarten Wullink <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Are we sure that it's a good idea to have a server response contain the used > extensions in both the media type parameter and in the json response? > the draft states that the contents should be the same, but it seems to me > this is something that might endup going wrong in practice and conflicting > extensions may possible be sent to the client. > > maybe the media-type extension parameter should only be used by the client to > signal the extension(s) used in the request message? > the server can then use the normal json rdapConformance array in the json > response? > > > best, > > Maarten > > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
