Repository navigation
Replies: 2 comments
|
Related to httos vs s3 URLs: Alternatively, provide both https and S3 links via alternate extension. That way tooling can decide what works best for their usecase (e.g. STAC Browser prioritizing https, while e.g. a CLI tool may prefer S3 access.) |
0 replies
|
So, decision:
|
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
The problem. Our spec currently contradicts itself about asset URLs. One page says asset links must be absolute S3 URLs. Another part of the spec (and the actual CLI behavior) uses relative links, because local catalogs are meant to be self-contained and portable. The validation rules try to split the difference using a concept called
is_published— but nothing anywhere defines what "published" actually means, and no code implements it. On top of that, Matthias pointed out that the page demanding "S3 URLs" shows anhttps://URL in its example, so it's not even clear which protocol we mean.Where we're leaning:
selflinks entirely. (A relativeselflink is meaningless, and STAC 1.1 actively rejects it. Omittingselflinks from self-contained catalogs is the documented STAC best practice anyway.)https://URLs — nots3://, because a browser can't fetch those.What we need from the group: agreement on the definition of "published" and on https as the canonical protocol.
Part of the July 2026 spec sprint. Hub: discussion #570 · work tracker: epic #564 · everything here carries the
spec-sprintlabel.All reactions