Skip to content

Conversation

@tomcrane
Copy link
Contributor

In order for a thumbs ADR there needed to be a delivery channels ADR.

Copy link
Member

@donaldgray donaldgray left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These 2 are a bit different from the other ADR's, should they be updated to follow a similar format? IIRC these are based on the madr template

* Status: proposed
* Deciders: Tom Crane
* Date: 2023-09-20

# Context and Problem Statement
xxx

# Considered Options
yyy

# Decision Outcome
zzz

Need to update the update docs/adr/readme.md to update index.

Should they link to the RFC where delivery-channels were first mentioned? https://github.com/dlcs/protagonist/blob/main/docs/rfcs/009-asset-family-improvements.md

Everything on a delivery channel is always served by the same application / service / component. Even if this means there is more than one delivery channel providing IIIF Image Services, or PDFs. It is not the format but the processing and transformation that determines the channel. An example of this is further developed in [ADR 0007](0007-delivery-channels-and-thumbs.md)


Future delivery channels could be things like:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Capture decision that delivery-channel always matches first slug in URL?

@donaldgray donaldgray changed the base branch from main to develop January 22, 2024 10:39
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 this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants