[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [rest-practices] [Fwd: [rhevm-api] concatenating Link headers in response to entry-point HEAD method]



By concatenation, you mean comma delimited, right? That's what the link header spec defines.

Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hey,

I thought this had been discussed here, but I don't think so.

Eoghan found some issues with including multiple Link: headers.

I've seen something similar - a ruby client was only giving me a single
Link: header.

We've decided to concatenate our Link headers together on the server
side, as ugly as that is.

Cheers,
Mark.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Eoghan Glynn <eglynn redhat com>
To: rhevm-api <rhevm-api lists fedorahosted org>
Subject: [rhevm-api] concatenating Link headers in response to
entry-point HEAD method
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:11:24 +0100


Folks,

We've noticed some funnies with the handling of multiple headers of the
same name by various REST providers, with RESTeasy concatenating the
header values into a comma separated list, and CXF JAX-RS seemingly
dropping all but the last header instance.

In the light of the following chapter & verse from the spec:

"Multiple message-header fields with the same field-name MAY be present
in a message if and only if the entire field-value for that header field
is defined as a comma-separated list [i.e., #(values)]. It MUST be
possible to combine the multiple header fields into one "field-name:
field-value" pair, without changing the semantics of the message, by
appending each subsequent field-value to the first, each separated by a
comma. The order in which header fields with the same field-name are
received is therefore significant to the interpretation of the combined
field value, and thus a proxy MUST NOT change the order of these field
values when a message is forwarded."[1]

It seems like a concatenation is the canonical form and least likely
cause trouble along the way. So how about we simply squash together the
Links set in the implementations of ApiResource.head()?

Cheers,
Eoghan


[1] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec4.html#sec4.2

_______________________________________________
rhevm-api mailing list
rhevm-api lists fedorahosted org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhevm-api


_______________________________________________
rest-practices mailing list
rest-practices redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rest-practices

--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]