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

Re: WGLC issue: (minor?) scope of client/server attributes (specifically: downgrades) in p1

From: Nils Goroll <slink@schokola.de>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:24:02 +0200
Message-ID: <5086FCE2.2090708@schokola.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Hi Mark,

On 10/23/12 01:09 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> we generally try not to define / require things unless they're needed for interoperability

So shouldn't the scope for downgrades be defined for interoperability?

For upgrades, the draft defines the scope to be the connection, and it appears 
to me that this would be a sensible scope also for downgrades.

Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 20:24:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:07 UTC