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

Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis

From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 03:55:55 -0400
Message-ID: <465FD10B.8030000@cs.utk.edu>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Robert Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>

>  Let me re-phrase that: does a rewrite/rearrangement affect the Draft
> Standard status? 
one of the main purposes of the document status is to show how much
confidence there is in the specification's clarity and accuracy.  if you
substantially rewrite a specification, whatever confidence you had in
the original specification no longer applies to the new specification. 
and you need to reestablish confidence in the rewritten specification. 
that implies a reset to Proposed.

so basically if you argue that the HTTP spec is so bad that a major
rewrite is needed, you're also arguing for
the rewritten HTTP spec to have a Proposed Standard status.  (as was
done for [2]822 and SMTP).
Received on Friday, 1 June 2007 07:56:26 GMT

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