Closed jordan2175 closed 6 years ago
I feel like the currently-specified behavior is correct. Clients that are able to process STIX 2.1 should include that in their Accept
header.
We could add a clarifying note about this to the spec or to an implementer's guide.
When would a user (not a developer or API caller) experience the 415 as outlined in this scenario?
The most common case, I'd expect, is the user accessing a TAXII endpoint using a browser. We allow for that by allowing TAXII endpoints to support multiple media types, including HTML.
Clients have two options to remediate this option:
Edit: This information is also present in the collections resource
Recommendation: Discuss if anything should be done, or if this is the desired state
If you only support say STIX 2.1 content and someone requests STIX 2.0 content, the spec says that you should return a 415 error code. When we wrote the spec, that seemed like a good things to do. However, I now feel like this is in error. This provides a terrible user experience
There should be some way of telling the client that you do not support STIX 2.0, but you DO have the content in STIX 2.1