W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-http-ng-comments@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: HTTP-NG: not a hypertext transfer protocol

From: <Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 16:30:00 PDT
To: ulrich.kunitz@db.COM
cc: www-http-ng-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <98Jul13.163022pdt."52364(2)"@alpha.xerox.com>
> The HTTP-NG protocol isn't according the architectural model a Hypertext
> Transfer Protocol. How about HOPP: hyperobject processing protocol?

"HTTP-NG" is not the name of the middle layer, it's the name of the whole
thing.  Yes, the middle and bottom layers need more generic names.

> I believe the whole thing is called HTTP-NG to solve some fund raising issues
> for a distributed architecture research project. HTTP-NG is not HTTP anymore,
> it solves a different set of problems.

If by "different" you mean "larger", that's so.  But then, the web keeps
getting pushed to do more things --- solve more problems.  So I think this is
fair, not semantic hash to solve funding problems.

> I fear that HTTP-NG is losing the most important feature of HTTP 1.x:

HTTP/0.9 is simple; HTTP/1.1 is not; HTTP/1.x for x>1 would be even more
complex.  "Simple" is a fairly vague, general word; you have to say what you
mean by it to have a useful discussion. HTTP-NG is simpler than HTTP/1.x in at
least one imporant way: it is more modular.  That is, rather than having one
big monolithic spec, we're factoring it into smaller pieces that stand on their
own (or at least on relatively few details of the other parts).
Received on Monday, 13 July 1998 19:30:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:37:19 UTC