W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1996

Re: cookie draft available

From: <hallam@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 96 17:15:55 -0400
Message-Id: <9604212115.AA22487@zorch.w3.org>
To: "David W. Morris" <dwm@shell.portal.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: hallam@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/273

>There seems to be an assumption that the full client implemenation would
>reside in the PDA rather than being split between the PDA and a larger
>PDAserversystem.  The comments I've read about the Oracle InternetBox
>proposal as well as two pre-InternetBox projects I consulted on briefly 
>lead me to believe that resource constrained PDAs etc. will not stand
>alone. Hence, I don't think 300 cookies is really a problem.

Hang on, if I buy a PDA claiming to give me access to the Web I want
it to talk standard protocols, not some proprietary protocol that locks
me in to one vendor.

I think that we should consider the HTTP based PDA in  our designs rather than 
assume that they will use non standard protocols and create a self fullfilling 

I don't see any reason why a person should really need so many cookies and I 
havent seen an actual justification apart from reference to people in the bowels 
of Netscape who apparently have opinions. 

I think that this is arguing for a "should" figure for the number of cookies 
rather than a "must". Since there is no requirement for the user to turn the 
cookies feature on there can be no logic in requiring that hardware must be 
capable of supporting a certain number of cookies.

We shoulkd also be carefull of suggesting enhancements because they only cost 
$20 or so. Some PDAs will cost less than than to build in total.

Received on Sunday, 21 April 1996 14:19:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:16 UTC