- From: Travis Snoozy (Volt) <a-travis@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 13:13:05 -0800
- To: Paul Leach <paulle@windows.microsoft.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Paul Leach said: > I don't think its worth making that change. > > We need to be considerate of the people reading the updated spec and > comparing it with the old one to see if they need to do anything. The > diffs should be minimized, and since this one won't actually cause anyone > to do anything to their code, it might just as well be omitted. ... but that is then inconsiderate of anyone who is reading the spec from scratch, is it not? And since this *does* center around a MUST-level requirement, I for one think it's very important to fix. Even though the likely intent is clear to anyone who thinks about it long enough, what the spec *says* will cause clients that do the sane thing to be non-conformant. On the other hand, I don't think that anyone really cares if their client/server is "HTTP/1.1 conformant" at this point. I can't recall anyone ever claiming conformance, and literal conformance is probably impossible anyway (due to internal requirement conflicts). From this perspective, we've got only an ad-hoc standard at best, and the MUSTs aren't really worth anything -- all that matters is "does my [client/server] work with [Apache/IIS/IE/Firefox/libwww/.NET]?" Thanks, -- Travis
Received on Thursday, 4 January 2007 21:13:22 UTC