Re: Comments on Section 3 of the Requirements Document

I'd like to see more discussion of whether we are extending HTTP, and if so
what that means.  Both the charter and the requirements describe what we are
doing as extending HTTP.  Maybe they should be changed to say something
broader, like "make extended authoring capabilities available on the Web" or
"on the Internet".  Or maybe we can be precise enough about what it is to
extend HTTP that it becomes a clear design guideline.

At 05:05 PM 2/11/97 PST, Yaron Goland wrote:
>	3.2. Legacy Client Support
>
>	WebDAV-compliant servers should be able to interoperate with
>non-WebDAV clients.
>
>Without a careful statement of the ramifications of this requirement I
>move that it be removed from the requirements.
>
>	3.4. HTTP Compatibility (new)
>
>	Our aim is to make extended authoring capabilities available
>through
>	HTTP.  In extending HTTP, we are obligated to follow its design
>	conventions and stay within its spirit.  This means, for
>example, that
>	methods should operate only on resources.  It means that
>parameters
>	should be communicated in headers.  These and other conventions
>should
>	be observed in the design of the extensions.
>
>HTTP has a spirit? Who will interpret this spirit? HTTP is a
>specification. Words written on a piece of paper. For us to declare that
>we are somehow the keepers of the spirit of HTTP is absurd. Our only
>obligation is to have this specification accepted by the IETF. If that
>should require changing HTTP and the IETF buys off on the idea, then so
>be it. We should not restrict ourselves when there is no compelling
>reason to do so.
>
>			Yaron
>
>
>
Name:			Judith A. Slein
E-Mail:			slein@wrc.xerox.com
Internal Phone:  	8*222-5169
External Phone:		(716) 422-5169
Fax:			(716) 265-7133
MailStop:		128-29E

Received on Wednesday, 12 February 1997 11:32:26 UTC