W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1997

Re: draft-holtman-http-safe-01.txt

From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 09:25:47 +0100 (MET)
Message-Id: <199703260825.JAA18977@wsooti08.win.tue.nl>
To: masinter@parc.xerox.com
Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/2899
Larry Masinter:
>> The Safe response header solves _some_ of the problems we have because we
>> don't have GET-WITH-BODY.  Once we GET-WITH-BODY is deployed though, Safe
>> becomes superfluous.
>> So it is Safe now, GET-WITH-BODY later.
>I think this is a dangerous strategy for standards track in the IETF,
>I think we should approach any feature that is designed to be
>superfluous later
>with great suspicion.

I proposed Safe to quicky solve a deployment problem for RFC2070.  It is a
bug fix, not a new feature.  If there had been more contacts between the
http-wg and the i18n group before both drafts went to last call, we would
not have had this deployment problem in the first place.

Please see my internet draft for a longer discussion of this issue.


Received on Wednesday, 26 March 1997 00:26:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:19 UTC