W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1995

Re: Moving HTTP 1.0 to informational

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 00:00:39 -0800
To: Paul Hoffman <paulh@imc.org>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <9512270000.aa24770@paris.ics.uci.edu>
I thought we were only going to include a brief note about these
features which are implemented on *some* systems, and not bother
to specify them fully (i.e., list the additional header field names
and their purpose, and explain why each one is not in the main spec). 
These features were not included because there do not exist sufficient
interoperable implementations which use them, not because of any lack
of consensus within the WG.  Any specification of them is therefore
incorrect, because the specification does not reflect current practice.

For example, current practice and "best practice" differ for Accept
and Accept-Language, since they are not implemented as specified, and
there is no point in including the actual implementation in the
specification because we already know that it doesn't work and
was never fully-implemented, and will probably change for HTTP/1.1.
Thus, I think we should just explain why it is not specified rather than
try to turn an appendix into an auxiliary specification.

 ...Roy T. Fielding
    Department of Information & Computer Science    (fielding@ics.uci.edu)
    University of California, Irvine, CA 92717-3425    fax:+1(714)824-4056
Received on Wednesday, 27 December 1995 00:12:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:15 UTC