W3C home
>
Mailing lists
>
Public
>
ietf-http-wg@w3.org
>
January to March 2008
ietf-http-wg@w3.org from January to March 2008 by thread
753 messages
:
Starting
Wednesday, 2 January 2008 21:12:00 GMT,
Ending
Monday, 31 March 2008 21:21:22 GMT
sort by
: [ thread ] [
author
] [
date
] [
subject
]
Mail actions
: [
mail a new topic
]
Help
: [
How to use the archives
] [
Search in the archives
]
i74 proposal take 2
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: i74 proposal take 2
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: i74 proposal take 2
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: i74 proposal take 2
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: i74 proposal take 2
Mark Nottingham
(Saturday, 29 March)
Re: i74 proposal take 2
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 29 March)
HTTPBis Summary
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 26 March)
PROPOSAL: i99 Pipelining Problems
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 26 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 26 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 26 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Martin Duerst
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Albert Lunde
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Martin Duerst
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Martin Duerst
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Saturday, 29 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Robert Brewer
(Wednesday, 26 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 27 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Robert Brewer
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Martin Duerst
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Martin Duerst
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 27 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Robert Brewer
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Saturday, 29 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Roy T. Fielding
(Saturday, 29 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Robert Sayre
(Saturday, 29 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Stefan Eissing
(Saturday, 29 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 29 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
David Morris
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Roy T. Fielding
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Monday, 31 March)
UTF-8 (was: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers)
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 31 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 28 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 28 March)
HttpOnly
Jim Manico
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: HttpOnly
Daniel Stenberg
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: HttpOnly
Jim Manico
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: HttpOnly
Carsten Bormann
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-nottingham-http-link-header-01.txt
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-nottingham-http-link-header-01.txt
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-nottingham-http-link-header-01.txt
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 19 March)
HTTPBIS Summary
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Martin Duerst
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Robert Siemer
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Nicolas Alvarez
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 18 March)
PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Stefan Eissing
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 17 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Brian Smith
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
John Kemp
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Stefan Eissing
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Wednesday, 19 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 20 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
David Morris
(Thursday, 20 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 20 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 20 March)
RE: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 20 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 20 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 20 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Robert Siemer
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i24 Requiring Allow in 405 Responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
307 Temporary Redirect
Nicolas Alvarez
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: 307 Temporary Redirect
Julian Reschke
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: 307 Temporary Redirect
Nicolas Alvarez
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: 307 Temporary Redirect
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
POWDER Use Case (was Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases)
Phil Archer
(Thursday, 13 March)
HTTPBIS Summary
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Werner Baumann
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Werner Baumann
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Werner Baumann
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Robert Siemer
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Werner Baumann
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Robert Siemer
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Lisa Dusseault
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Robert Siemer
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: Weak Validator definition [i101]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Sunday, 9 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 10 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 10 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Monday, 10 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 12 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 12 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 12 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 12 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Martin Duerst
(Friday, 14 March)
IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP (was: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases)
Frank Ellermann
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP (was: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases)
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Martin Duerst
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Phil Archer
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Anne van Kesteren
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Anne van Kesteren
(Monday, 17 March)
Link header field titles (was: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP)
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: Link header field titles
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: Link header field titles
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: Link header field titles
Martin Duerst
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: Link header field titles
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 14 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Brian Smith
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 14 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Brian Smith
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 14 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Brian Smith
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Frank Ellermann
(Saturday, 15 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Brian Smith
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Frank Ellermann
(Saturday, 15 March)
Content-Disposition filename encoding, was: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Julian Reschke
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding, was: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Julian Reschke
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Frank Ellermann
(Sunday, 16 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 24 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 24 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 24 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 24 March)
Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding, was: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Martin Duerst
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 14 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Brian Smith
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Monday, 17 March)
RE: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Paul Hoffman
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Martin Duerst
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 18 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Wednesday, 12 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Wednesday, 12 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Harry Halpin
(Wednesday, 12 March)
RE: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: Reviving HTTP Header Linking: Some code and use-cases
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 15 March)
Indicating response errors after the status-line is sent
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 5 March)
Re: Indicating response errors after the status-line is sent
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: Indicating response errors after the status-line is sent
Robert Siemer
(Saturday, 15 March)
NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 5 March)
RE: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 5 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Robert Siemer
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Robert Siemer
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Adrien de Croy
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 7 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Adrien de Croy
(Friday, 7 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE(S): Retrying Requests
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 7 March)
Connection limits
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 5 March)
Re: Connection limits
David Morris
(Wednesday, 5 March)
RE: Connection limits
Josh Cohen (MIG)
(Wednesday, 5 March)
Re: Connection limits
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 5 March)
Re: Connection limits
Adrien de Croy
(Wednesday, 5 March)
RE: Connection limits
Eric Lawrence
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: Connection limits
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: Connection limits
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 6 March)
RE: Connection limits
Eric Lawrence
(Thursday, 6 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE: Monitoring Connections text
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 5 March)
HTTPBIS Summary
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 3 March)
Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Robert Siemer
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
RE: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Brian Smith
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header
Robert Siemer
(Sunday, 16 March)
Transfer-Encoding:chunked
szukw000@arcor.de
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Transfer-Encoding:chunked
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: i107
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 28 February)
RE: i107
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 28 February)
RE: i107
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: i107
Brian Smith
(Friday, 14 March)
RE: i107
Henrik Nordstrom
(Friday, 14 March)
PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: PROPOSAL: i76 Use Proxy
David Morris
(Thursday, 27 March)
i69: Requested Variant - moving forward
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i69: Requested Variant - moving forward
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
Robert Siemer
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response
Dan Winship
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: New issue: 15.3 misguided?
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Suggestion for NEW Issue: Pipelining problems
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Suggestion for NEW Issue: Pipelining problems
Adrian Chadd
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Suggestion for NEW Issue: Pipelining problems
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: Suggestion for NEW Issue: Pipelining problems
Robert Siemer
(Monday, 3 March)
Pipelining problems [i99]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
RE: Pipelining problems [i99]
Josh Cohen (MIG)
(Friday, 14 March)
Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 27 February)
RE: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 27 February)
RE: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 27 February)
RE: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: Unknown and misplaced headers as entity headers
Brian Smith
(Friday, 14 March)
Header type defaulting [i104]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Reclassification of Allow as a response header
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
RE: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 28 February)
RE: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 29 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 29 February)
Re: Reclassification of Allow as a response header [i105]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
BIS -02 Drafts
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 26 February)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Friday, 22 February)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Paul Hoffman
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Martin Duerst
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Monday, 17 March)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Robert Siemer
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Paul Hoffman
(Saturday, 15 March)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-01.txt
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Monday, 17 March)
PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 16 February)
RE: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Brian Smith
(Saturday, 16 February)
RE: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Brian Smith
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 16 February)
RE: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Brian Smith
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 16 February)
Content-* Semantics [i103]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
RE: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
RE: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Frank Ellermann
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Content-* Semantics [i103][i102]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Robert Sayre
(Thursday, 28 February)
FW: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Brian Smith
(Friday, 29 February)
Re: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 29 February)
Re: Content-* Semantics [i103]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Subbu Allamaraju
(Saturday, 16 February)
RE: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Brian Smith
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Roy T. Fielding
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Robert Sayre
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Roy T. Fielding
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
James M Snell
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Robert Sayre
(Saturday, 16 February)
Re: PATCH vs multipart/byteranges vs Content-Range
Adrien de Croy
(Saturday, 16 February)
Access Control for Cross-site Requests WD Published
Anne van Kesteren
(Friday, 15 February)
Re: Fwd: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordström
(Friday, 15 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Stefan Eissing
(Friday, 29 February)
RE: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Brian Smith
(Friday, 29 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Roy T. Fielding
(Friday, 29 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Robert Siemer
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 3 March)
RE: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Brian Smith
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
John Kemp
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
John Kemp
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
John Kemp
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Roy T. Fielding
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Robert Sayre
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Baker
(Monday, 3 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
John Kemp
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
John Kemp
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 4 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Friday, 14 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 29 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
Content negotiation for request bodies
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
Adrien de Croy
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
David Morris
(Sunday, 24 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
Adrien de Croy
(Sunday, 24 February)
RE: Content negotiation for request bodies
Brian Smith
(Sunday, 24 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
David Morris
(Monday, 25 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
Jamie Lokier
(Monday, 25 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
Henrik Nordström
(Sunday, 24 February)
RE: Content negotiation for request bodies
Brian Smith
(Sunday, 24 February)
RE: Content negotiation for request bodies
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
RE: Content negotiation for request bodies
Brian Smith
(Friday, 14 March)
RE: Content negotiation for request bodies
Brian Smith
(Sunday, 24 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
Jamie Lokier
(Monday, 25 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 26 February)
Re: Content negotiation for request bodies
Adrien de Croy
(Tuesday, 26 February)
RE: Content negotiation for request bodies
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Is Content-Range extensible?
Subbu Allamaraju
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: Is Content-Range extensible?
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
wildcards in digest auth domain field
Tim Olsen
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: wildcards in digest auth domain field
Paul Hoffman
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: wildcards in digest auth domain field
Tim Olsen
(Thursday, 14 February)
i76: 305 Use Proxy
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i76: 305 Use Proxy
David Morris
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i76: 305 Use Proxy
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
order of Accept-* and Server-Driven negotiation
olivier Thereaux
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: order of Accept-* and Server-Driven negotiation
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: order of Accept-* and Server-Driven negotiation
Javier Godoy
(Wednesday, 13 February)
ABNF conversion status (issue <http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/36>)
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Description section removed from charter?
Michael(tm) Smith
(Friday, 8 February)
Re: Description section removed from charter?
David Morris
(Friday, 8 February)
Re: Description section removed from charter?
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 8 February)
FYI: Firefox 3 beta 4 will enable pipelining over https
Robert Sayre
(Thursday, 7 February)
503, 403 & Retry-After: enforcing a limit on the number of requests allowed
Hugo Haas
(Wednesday, 6 February)
Re: 503, 403 & Retry-After: enforcing a limit on the number of requests allowed
Henrik Nordström
(Friday, 8 February)
Re: does no-store request invalidate? [i23]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: does no-store request invalidate? [i23]
David Morris
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: does no-store request invalidate? [i23]
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Baker
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordström
(Wednesday, 6 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Baker
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Robert Sayre
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Robert Sayre
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Robert Sayre
(Friday, 7 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 12 March)
Re: i24: Requiring Allow in 405 responses
Henrik Nordstrom
(Thursday, 13 March)
CONNECT message including tunneled data
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Adrien de Croy
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 31 January)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Adrien de Croy
(Thursday, 31 January)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 31 January)
RE: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Adrien de Croy
(Friday, 1 February)
RE: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Henrik Nordström
(Friday, 1 February)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Jamie Lokier
(Friday, 1 February)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Adrien de Croy
(Friday, 1 February)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 31 January)
Re: CONNECT message including tunneled data
Henrik Nordström
(Friday, 1 February)
HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 25 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 25 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 25 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Robert Siemer
(Friday, 25 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Frank Ellermann
(Saturday, 26 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Ian Hickson
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Stefan Eissing
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Stefan Eissing
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Robert Siemer
(Tuesday, 29 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Ian Hickson
(Wednesday, 30 January)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Ian Hickson
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Ian Hickson
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Ian Hickson
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
David Morris
(Monday, 4 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 2 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: HTML5 vs content type sniffing
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Javascript URI scheme (ACTION-46)
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 25 January)
Re: Javascript URI scheme (ACTION-46)
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 25 January)
new issue: mismatch between RFC2616 and RFC4234 CHAR definition
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: new issue: mismatch between RFC2616 and RFC4234 CHAR definition
lists@ingostruck.de
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: new issue: mismatch between RFC2616 and RFC4234 CHAR definition
lists@ingostruck.de
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: new issue: mismatch between RFC2616 and RFC4234 CHAR definition
Frank Ellermann
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: new issue: mismatch between RFC2616 and RFC4234 CHAR definition
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: new issue: mismatch between RFC2616 and RFC4234 CHAR definition
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: new issue: mismatch between RFC2616 and RFC4234 CHAR definition
Julian Reschke
(Saturday, 2 February)
Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Hoffman
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Hoffman
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Hoffman
(Monday, 28 January)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Leach
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Roy T. Fielding
(Friday, 1 February)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Leach
(Friday, 1 February)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Roy T. Fielding
(Friday, 1 February)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Leach
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Jamie Lokier
(Monday, 28 January)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Leach
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Jamie Lokier
(Tuesday, 29 January)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Leach
(Wednesday, 30 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Jamie Lokier
(Thursday, 31 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Adrien de Croy
(Monday, 28 January)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Robert Sayre
(Thursday, 31 January)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Leach
(Wednesday, 6 February)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Robert Sayre
(Wednesday, 6 February)
Re: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Robert Sayre
(Sunday, 3 February)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Mike Dierken
(Sunday, 3 February)
RE: Security Requirements for HTTP, draft -00
Paul Hoffman
(Sunday, 3 February)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-security-properties-00.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: PUT, side effects and 201 Created? [ i21 ]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 22 January)
Re: PUT, side effects and 201 Created? [ i21 ]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 22 January)
Re: PUT, side effects and 201 Created? [ i21 ]
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 30 January)
Re: Request methods that allow an entity-body [i19]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 22 January)
Re: Request methods that allow an entity-body [i19]
David Morris
(Wednesday, 23 January)
HTTP 2.0: Request from server to clients at persistent connection
Зимаков Павел
(Friday, 18 January)
RE: HTTP 2.0: Request from server to clients at persistent connection
Mike Dierken
(Sunday, 3 February)
Re: HTTP 2.0: Request from server to clients at persistent connection
Carsten Bormann
(Sunday, 3 February)
RE: HTTP 2.0: Request from server to clients at persistent connection
Mike Dierken
(Monday, 4 February)
Re: HTTP 2.0: Request from server to clients at persistent connection
Lisa Dusseault
(Saturday, 9 February)
Re: HTTP 2.0: Request from server to clients at persistent connection
Mark Baker
(Saturday, 9 February)
Content-Length and 1xx status codes
Adrien de Croy
(Thursday, 17 January)
Re: Content-Length and 1xx status codes
Henrik Nordström
(Thursday, 17 January)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Sunday, 13 January)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Sunday, 13 January)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Sunday, 13 January)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Sunday, 13 January)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Sunday, 13 January)
Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-01.txt
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 18 January)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Sunday, 13 January)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-01.txt
Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
(Sunday, 13 January)
Books about HTTP "spirit"?
Robert Siemer
(Sunday, 13 January)
SRV records for HTTP
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Friday, 11 January)
Re: SRV records for HTTP
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 11 January)
Re: SRV records for HTTP
Stephane Bortzmeyer
(Friday, 11 January)
Re: SRV records for HTTP
Adrian Chadd
(Friday, 11 January)
http over sctp?
Adrian Chadd
(Wednesday, 9 January)
Re: http over sctp?
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 10 January)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 9 January)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 10 January)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 30 January)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 31 January)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Yves Lafon
(Thursday, 31 January)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 31 January)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 31 January)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Yves Lafon
(Thursday, 31 January)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Stefan Eissing
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Yves Lafon
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Yves Lafon
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Subbu Allamaraju
(Monday, 25 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 26 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Subbu Allamaraju
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Adrien de Croy
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant"
Robert Siemer
(Friday, 15 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant"
Roy T. Fielding
(Friday, 15 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant"
Brian Smith
(Friday, 15 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
RE: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Brian Smith
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Re: i69: Clarify "Requested Variant" [was: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 28 February)
Philidelphia
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 8 January)
Re: conditional request vs GET (new issue?)
Mark Nottingham
(Saturday, 5 January)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes
Julian Reschke
(Friday, 4 January)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 8 January)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 9 January)
RE: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Robert Brewer
(Wednesday, 9 January)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Javier Godoy
(Wednesday, 9 January)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Geoffrey Sneddon
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Robert Sayre
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Roy T. Fielding
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Geoffrey Sneddon
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Robert Sayre
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 13 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Yutaka OIWA
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 14 February)
PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Julian Reschke
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Roy T. Fielding
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 15 February)
Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 19 February)
Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 19 February)
RE: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Brian Smith
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 27 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Thursday, 14 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Roy T. Fielding
(Friday, 15 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Friday, 15 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 11 March)
Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Simon Perreault
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Martin Duerst
(Wednesday, 26 March)
Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Wednesday, 26 March)
Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Martin Duerst
(Thursday, 27 March)
OT: History (was: Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20])
Martin Duerst
(Thursday, 27 March)
Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Henrik Nordstrom
(Tuesday, 25 March)
Re: Default charsets for text media types [i20]
Martin Duerst
(Wednesday, 26 March)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Geoffrey Sneddon
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Albert Lunde
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes [i20]
Frank Ellermann
(Tuesday, 12 February)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes
Geoffrey Sneddon
(Thursday, 10 January)
text/* types and charset defaults
Larry Masinter
(Sunday, 13 January)
Re: text/* types and charset defaults
Julian Reschke
(Sunday, 20 January)
Re: text/* types and charset defaults
Frank Ellermann
(Sunday, 20 January)
Re: text/* types and charset defaults
Albert Lunde
(Sunday, 20 January)
Re: text/* types and charset defaults [i20]
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 22 January)
Re: text/* types and charset defaults [i20]
Julian Reschke
(Tuesday, 22 January)
security impact of dropping charset default [Re: text/* types and charset defaults [i20]]
Yutaka Oiwa
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default [Re: text/* types and charset defaults [i20]]
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default [Re: text/* types and charset defaults [i20]]
Yutaka Oiwa
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Frank Ellermann
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Anne van Kesteren
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Anne van Kesteren
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
David Morris
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Frank Ellermann
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Roy T. Fielding
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Adrien de Croy
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Mark Nottingham
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Adrien de Croy
(Thursday, 24 January)
"HTTP for Web Browsers and Servers"
Larry Masinter
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: "HTTP for Web Browsers and Servers"
Geoffrey Sneddon
(Thursday, 24 January)
RE: "HTTP for Web Browsers and Servers"
Larry Masinter
(Friday, 25 January)
Re: "HTTP for Web Browsers and Servers"
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 30 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 30 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Yves Lafon
(Thursday, 24 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Henrik Nordström
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 5 February)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Frank Ellermann
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
Anne van Kesteren
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default
James Graham
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: security impact of dropping charset default [Re: text/* types and charset defaults [i20]]
Julian Reschke
(Wednesday, 23 January)
Re: Unknown text/* subtypes
Ian Hickson
(Sunday, 13 January)
Re: Re: Unknown text/* subtypes
Eric Prud'hommeaux
(Sunday, 13 January)
RE: Unknown text/* subtypes
Larry Masinter
(Thursday, 17 January)
<