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

Re: 301/302

From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 20:37:08 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199709031837.UAA19378@wsooti08.win.tue.nl>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Cc: lawrence@agranat.com, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/4289
Larry Masinter:
>>   I strongly agree with the 307 proposal cited above.  It is most
>>   unfair to those who have made the effort to read and understand the
>>   specifications to change them now by swapping the codes, even if
>>   there is time for them to recover (which we cannot know in any
>>   case).
>I don't think it is a good policy to make technical decisions on the
>grounds of whether or not the decision is 'unfair' to one or another
>group of implementors.

I strongly disagree.  Being fair to early implementers is a very valid
consideration.  Without early implementers, the IETF cannot develop
standards, so we had better maintain good relations with them.

>[...] while the case for "swap 302/303" has been stronger.

I do not consider the `less cruft' case for swapping 302/303 to be very

All in all, having heard the feedback from early implementers, I am
now in favour of going for the 307 solution.

Received on Wednesday, 3 September 1997 11:40:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:21 UTC