- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 11:14:47 +0100
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Bjoern Hoehrmann schrieb: >> * Identify mandatory-to-implement security mechanisms > > This sounds rather controversial. True. Please make this an option. >> The Working Group's sole specification deliverable is a document that >> is suitable to supersede RFC2616. > > I think the Working Group should be given the option to produce more > than one document to supercede RFC 2616; various suggestions what > could be factored out have been made here. The group might well decide > that keeping everything in one document is best, but it should not be > required to recharter if it decides otherwise. In agree in theory. In practice, re-organizing the document that much is likely to collide with the goal to keep changes to minimum. That being said, I'd be ok with "one or more documents". Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2007 10:14:56 UTC