W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 15:57:08 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=+_hWC9KyzCw9Ywzgg_Bag9c7XRM2==7mb1qV8@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net> wrote:
> Adam Barth wrote:
>> Right, this document is useful to folks who would like to generate
>> this header.  It's a generative profile.  As such, its a profile for
>> servers.  I'm just asking that the document be upfront about that.
> Is Last Call for this draft the appropriate venue to agitate for change
> to the way RFCs are generally written?

I'm not agitating for a change to how RFCs are generally written.  I'm
saying that this document defines a profile of an existing protocol
element.  The profile is useful to servers.  The profile is not useful
for user agents.  The document should be clear about it's scope.

> What you're suggesting sounds like wholesale change to HTTP,

That's not what I'm suggesting.  HTTP is not a profile of another protocol.

Received on Saturday, 2 October 2010 23:03:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:55 UTC