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

Re: [RFC] HTTP Information Request

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:41:22 +0200
To: Stefanos Harhalakis <v13@priest.com>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1182282082.31612.125.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
tis 2007-06-19 klockan 21:12 +0300 skrev Stefanos Harhalakis:
> On Saturday 16 June 2007, Stefanos Harhalakis wrote:
> >   Here is a more formal proposal for the 'Client Information' message I've
> > sent 3 days before. After examining the 'Timezone Information' feedback I
> > came to the conclusion that we need something like this.
> >
> >   This draft is not submitted yet since I would like to first send it here.
> > I hope that you'll be interrested in this and that you'll find it usefull.
>   I'm sorry if I'm annoying you by insisting on this but I really want to know 
> whether the not-a-single-reply means 'go-on' or 'that's a bad idea'...

For one thing you posted the message on a Saturday, and it's only
Tuesday today..

Personally I am missing a list of information tokens clients should be
expected to support.  We have talked about the timezone. What else do
you have in mind that this mechanism should be used for. It's a bit hard
to discuss the mechanism without a few use cases to back it up..

Also see the negotiation a little problematic as it relies on the client
keeping track of prior preferences of the server, but it's no worse than
cookies so I don't mind much.. authors using the feature just have to
learn how to get it negotiated proper.


Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 19:41:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:42 UTC