- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 01:04:47 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:37:33AM +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > Re HTTP/next: it would be good to collect a list of things we think we > > should make progress on; not surprisingly, I'd nominate I18N for header > > field values. > > So, that's an interesting question. > > If we want HTTP/1.1 <-> 2.0 gateways, and we don't want to force them to know > about individual header semantics, that implies that we can't really change > header encoding, doesn't it? Unless we clearly define the transformation operation, which might be lossy and advertised as one operational limit to such gateways. Just my 2 cents, Willy
Received on Saturday, 28 January 2012 00:06:54 UTC