W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2012

RE: Rechartering HTTPbis

From: Robert Brewer <fumanchu@aminus.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 07:58:41 -0800
Message-ID: <F1962646D3B64642B7C9A06068EE1E6414626856@ex10.hostedexchange.local>
To: "Amos Jeffries" <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Amos Jeffries wrote:
> For example, simply truncating the common header names down to 1 or 2
> bytes and moving to a better timestamp format we could meet all the
> HTTP/2.0 requirements:
>   * chop out a visible % of HTTP traffic size
>   * be syntactically incompatible with HTTP/1.x
>   * capable of trivially gatewaying 1.1-over-2.0 and vice versa
>   * with full semantic and feature equivalence
>   * and lower barriers to implementation (fingers on telnet + fewer
> bytes = win)

Given that the extreme majority of HTTP traffic is automatically
generated, typically via use of a framework, I suspect that far more
humans read HTTP messages directly than write them directly.
Consequently, fewer bytes in header names is probably more of a loss due
to the cognitive load than a win due to reduced keystrokes. It might be
chosen to reduce packet size, but shouldn't be chosen to save fingers.

And I can't believe I'm even writing this, because it's *way* too early
to start offering or debating solutions when we've hardly begun
discussing requirements.


Robert Brewer
fumanchu@aminus.org
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 15:59:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:53 GMT