- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:29:41 -0400
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
Larry Masinter scripsit: > While gopher is implemented, it is not widely implementation, > implementations are declining rather than rising > http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/, and there is no interest > in further work, updating gopher or advancement. These are good arguments for making a gopher URI RFC and marking it Historic, but not for abandoning it altogether. The wais and prospero URIs, OTOH, never had significant implementation and can IMHO be allowed to languish in Obsolete status. > Certainly there may be some interest in preserving > antique protocols for fun and amusement, but there's > no point in advancing them along standards track. Agreed; hence the utility of Historic status. > I see real value in updating 'file', 'ftp' and (to some > degree) 'telnet' to match their actual use, and I appreciate > the effort to bring them along and advance them on > standards track. Agreed. -- Real FORTRAN programmers can program FORTRAN John Cowan in any language. --Allen Brown jcowan@reutershealth.com
Received on Friday, 22 October 2004 13:30:48 UTC