You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by Julian Reschke <re...@apache.org> on 2026/08/20 16:14:47 UTC

A home for RFC 9651 (Structured Field Values) in Sling?

Hi Sling Developers,

As modern HTTP header fields increasingly rely on RFC 9651 (which 
obsoleted RFC 8941), my Java implementation 
(https://github.com/reschke/structured-fields) is looking for a cozy 
home under the Apache umbrella.

I propose creating a standalone org.apache.sling.http.structuredfields 
bundle wrapping this zero-dependency library.

Why this makes sense:

Modularity: Keeps core Sling lean while letting interested bundles opt-in.

Sanity: Replaces error-prone string splitting with a robust, 
spec-compliant service.

I’m happy to get the ball rolling in the Sling Whiteboard. Does the 
community think this is a good spot for it?

Best regards,

Julian Reschke

PS: see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8941/referencedby/ and 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9651/referencedby/ for specs using 
this syntax.

Re: A home for RFC 9651 (Structured Field Values) in Sling?

Posted by Robert Munteanu <ro...@apache.org>.

Hi Julian,

On Thu, 2026-08-20 at 18:14 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Hi Sling Developers,
> 
> As modern HTTP header fields increasingly rely on RFC 9651 (which 
> obsoleted RFC 8941), my Java implementation 
> (https://github.com/reschke/structured-fields) is looking for a cozy 
> home under the Apache umbrella.
> 
> I propose creating a standalone
> org.apache.sling.http.structuredfields 
> bundle wrapping this zero-dependency library.
> 
> Why this makes sense:
> 
> Modularity: Keeps core Sling lean while letting interested bundles
> opt-in.
> 
> Sanity: Replaces error-prone string splitting with a robust, 
> spec-compliant service.
> 
> I’m happy to get the ball rolling in the Sling Whiteboard. Does the 
> community think this is a good spot for it?

Sure, there's no gate for entering the whiteboard :-)

If this is a zero-dep library you should probably use
'org.apache.sling.commons.....' since there is no requirement to use
Sling.

Briefly looking at the code, this looks like functionality for Sling
applications that work with HTTP headers in particular, rather than an
addition to the Sling Engine. Is my understanding correct?

Thanks,
Robert

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Julian Reschke
> 
> PS: see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8941/referencedby/ and 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9651/referencedby/ for specs
> using 
> this syntax.