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

Re: (revised) HTTP working group status

From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 00:43:19 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199608192243.AAA07262@wsooti04.win.tue.nl>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1413
Larry Masinter:
>PLEASE send me any corrections.

>- content negotiation: draft-holtman-http-negotiation-02.txt
>    Andy Mutz will co-edit with Koen Holtman.
>    Active discussion in the working group on details.
>    (I also have private mail suggesting that W3C may also
>    contribute, but no details or timetable.)
>- User Agent characteristics: draft-mutz-http-attributes-01.txt
>  Aug 1 draft ties in with content negotiation proposal; needs
>  non-numeric attributes.

`needs needs non-numeric attributes' is a but ambiguous.  More
accurate is `future version will use non-numeric attributes'.  And at
the end of the `content negotiation' paragraph: `future version will
define non-numeric attributes'.

   - - -

Please also put these issues on the list:

- there is a desire to make a shared recommendation on the use of the
1.1 version number

- when creating 1.1, we used the following rule a number of times:

 Any proposed HTTP/1.1 features not in HTTP/1.0 for which there is no
 consensus will revert to HTTP/1.0 status in 1.1 and be considered for
 inclusion in HTTP/1.2.

This rule also implies a promise that deferred proposals would not
disappear into the bit bucket.  I therefore propose an action item to
gather such `not 1.1' things from the 1.1 issues list and record them
in a document, to be passed on to any future 1.2 WG.  (By the way,
have we decided already that this WG would not do 1.2?)


Received on Monday, 19 August 1996 15:45:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:18 UTC