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

RE: Revised charter proposal

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:39:53 -0700
To: "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "'HTTP Working Group'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000001c7d07d$862eec60$928cc520$@org>

Some minor suggestions to the charter, for your consideration:

OLD:
   Additionally, after years of implementation and extension,  
   several ambiguities have arisen, impairing interoperability and the  
   ability to easily implement and use HTTP to its full potential.

s/arisen/become evident/
  (the ambiguities were there)
s/use HTTP to its full potential./use HTTP./
  (potential would include controlling coffee pots)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Add:
   * Update references

(I think this is necessary)
------------------------------------------------------------------
   * Include (non-normative) references to
     extensions and applicability statements

(More controversial, but I think a reference to BCP 56/RFC 3205 would
be in order, as well as a reference to WebDAV and other protocols 
that use HTTP as a substrate)
------------------------------------------------------------------
OLD:
 * Improve editorial quality

NEW:
 * Fix editorial problems which have led to
   misunderstandings of the specification

(you don't want to be mandated to fix all editorial problems)
-------------------------------------------------------------
OLD: 
 * Remove or deprecate those features that are not widely  
   implemented, unduly affect interoperability and are not well-supported

NEW:
  * Remove or deprecate those features that are
    not widely implemented, not well-supported and also
    unduly affect interoperability.

(I think that's what you meant, but I wasn't sure of the
scope of the 'and'. I'm not actually clear on what is intended by
'not well-supported', though.)
-----------------------------------------------------------
OLD:
  Additionally, the Working Group should review (and may document) test  
  suites for HTTP conformance, as they are made available.

s/should review (and may document)/may review (and document)/

(You don't want to be mandated to consider test suites if
you're otherwise done.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
OLD:
   * Clarify methods of extensibility

NEW:
   * Clarify existing methods of extensibility
Received on Friday, 27 July 2007 18:40:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:15 GMT