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

Re: Content negotiation, features, and related items

From: Ted Hardie <hardie@thornhill.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 16:41:36 -0700
Message-Id: <9710211641.ZM11411@thornhill.arc.nasa.gov>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>, Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/4588
On Oct 21,  8:38pm, Koen Holtman wrote:

> ><draft-ietf-http-feature-reg-02.txt>
> >  Feature Tag Registration Procedures
> >   Action: This document includes both the 'registration procedure'
> >     and also the definition of some initial feature tags. These
> >     should be separated. Ted Hardie is working on this.
> ???  The above document does not define any initial feature tags, so
> there is no need to work on separating them.  Or am I missing
> something obvious here?
> Koen.
>-- End of excerpt from Koen Holtman

	In some talks with Andy Mutz and Larry Masinter I mentioned
that I thought that it would be easier to get IANA support if we kept
the registration procedures draft to just those things which IANA
would need to check off when they got a feature to register.  This was
based on feedback I got from Jon Postel and Joyce Reynolds when I was
writing up registration procedures for SOIF template types (part of
the CIP working going on in the FIND working group).  My take on it is
that they prefer the registration procedures documents to be revisable
without forcing a revision of the technical specification.  This means
paring down the draft to just the procedures and putting the other
sections somewhere else.  That led me to volunteer to Andy and Larry
that I would try to split the draft up, so that we could see which
bits fell where.  I have not yet had the chance to sit down and really
write up the result, but my current sense is that Section 1, Section
2.4, Section 3.1.*, and Sections 3.[5,6,8] are the ones containing the
procedural elements.  I meant to send off a note with the results
as soon as I had gotten the drafts written, but that has taken longer
than I anticipated.  My apologies if the delay has caused any confusion.
			Ted Hardie
Received on Tuesday, 21 October 1997 16:44:51 UTC

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