W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2007

RE: Straw-man charter for http-bis

From: Paul Leach <paulle@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:05:40 -0700
Message-ID: <76323E9F0A911944A4E9225FACFC55BA04AFFB6C@WIN-MSG-20.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Roy T.Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
CC: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>

Sometimes, the best is the enemy of the good. I think this is one of
cases. As all good engineers should, I have great emotional sympathy for
Roy's approach of producing the best possible HTTP spec, but while a
brand-new, easy-to-implement-from HTTP/1.1 spec would sure be wonderful,
if it isn't very likely to get done, then it isn't in reality better
than a careful revision of the current one. (Another aspect of good
engineering is dealing with tradeoffs.)

Indeed, the above analysis also applies to the proposed charter:
wouldn't an informational RFC "HTTP Implementors Guide" be nearly as
good as the proposed RFC2616bis? And far less work, hence available much
sooner?

(And hey, since it isn't us, who are these evil "short-term corporate
interests"? Are they available to  take other heat off us, too? :-)
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2007 22:06:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:10 GMT