Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Client and Server Implementation Guidelines for Common HTTP Use cases #92

Open
kkostov opened this issue Nov 8, 2023 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #111
Open

Client and Server Implementation Guidelines for Common HTTP Use cases #92

kkostov opened this issue Nov 8, 2023 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #111

Comments

@kkostov
Copy link

kkostov commented Nov 8, 2023

When creating a production implementation of the spec (both client and server-side), it may be beneficial to have access to a set of guidelines on how to tackle common technical implementation details:

  • Handling of redirects along the graph
  • Handling upgrade of HTTP to HTTPS
  • CORS
  • The need to pass custom headers in case of scenarios like authentication or API limits?
  • ...
@pietercolpaert
Copy link
Member

Found an interesting example for this: https://iiif.io/api/discovery/1.0/#4-network-considerations

@kkostov
Copy link
Author

kkostov commented Nov 9, 2023

@pietercolpaert this is an excellent example, I like that the guidelines also appear as a SHOULD.

@sandervd
Copy link

  • A server should define a default Accept header (e.g. if no accept is defined, return content type Turtle)

@pietercolpaert
Copy link
Member

Related to #111 and #112 , I think it makes sense to do this in specifications that use the TREE specification that are directed towards server implementers. TREE should not do this as it is directed towards clients.

@pietercolpaert pietercolpaert linked a pull request Sep 2, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants