- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 09:50:21 PDT
- To: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
What do you think about splitting out the 'Requirements'
part of the TCN document, and seeing if we can release it
as an Informational RFC that is a product of the working group.
The exact proposal, then, can be released as Experimental.
That would encourage experimentation, and allow simple
migration to standards track if experimentation proved it
successful as a way of dealing with things like handhelds,
embedded web browsers in your cell phone & microwave oven,
etc.
Competing proposals using Java or other client-side execution
systems with safe access to client parameters could then
also be experimented with freely, but we'd have the foundation
of:
a) what problem are we trying to solve?
b) the registration mechanism for features
I think we might be able to make progress more quickly, then.
The only funny thing would be to try to publish a BCP laying
out the mechanism for feature registration while, at the same
time, having the only official IETF protocol that used those
features being an Experimental HTTP extension. But maybe that's
OK.
Could we get three documents finished by August?
"Requirements for Content Negotiation" => Informational RFC
"Registration of features for content negotiation" => BCP
"Transparent Content Negotiation in HTTP" => Experimental
--
http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter
Received on Friday, 30 May 1997 09:58:02 UTC