- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 11:38:20 +1000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, Mike Kelly <mike@stateless.co>
On 02/06/2012, at 8:59 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2012-06-01 03:08, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> We've published an -02 draft of LCI: >> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-linked-cache-inv-02> >> >> and intend to request publication as an Individual Submission Informational RFC soon (the link relations have just been submitted for review). Feedback still welcome (http list is best, I think). >> ... > > HTTPbis introduces a registry for cache directives (see <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-19.html#rfc.section.3.2.3>). > > Would it make sense to change the dependency from RFC 2616 to HTTPbis, and to register as defined in Part 6? I'm not against it, although it'd require reworking the BNF. I'll look into it. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 01:38:56 UTC