W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > May to June 2006

Re: Is there any ongoing work on HTTP?

From: Harry Maugans <hmaugans@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 15:49:01 -0400
Message-ID: <e74da3890605101249k54c9928av9544170729973e7@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-talk@w3.org

I personally have never had a problem with that.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding
what you're saying, but can't one just reference the HTTP_REFERER flag (in
PHP at least)?

Or for that matter, some websites might not require the code page of the
response and would rather blindly process the form, so forcing it into
standards might add unnecessary bulk.


-Harry Maugans
 www.harrymaugans.com <http://www.harrymaugans.com>

On 5/9/06, Maurice Smulders <msmulders@novell.com> wrote:
>  Hello,
>  There is one more big deficiency IMHO:
>  A POST response does not include the code page of the response.
> i.e. The code page of response is depended on one of the following
> settings
>  1) Browser setting
> 2) Char set settings in header
> 3) Char set settings in Meta tag
> 4) %Charset in DTD
> 5) Accept-Charset in Form tag.
>  For intermediate proxies interpreting the information, this is very very
> difficult. This is going to be much more an issue with
> internationalization... Even if a proxy would be maintaining the state
> across a request, the browser setting is the one which is the most difficult
> to figure out...
> I can see one intermediate solution, and that is to write some javascript
> which queries the browser for that information, and builds a x- header with
> that in it. But I think the better solution would be a standardized method
> which all browsers have to support...
>  This one seems to be between the HTTP and HTML spec, and kinda fell
> between the cracks?
>  Maurice
> >>> "Sylvain Hellegouarch" <sh@defuze.org> 05/09/06 8:33 AM >>>
> Hello everyone,
> The W3 protocols page states:
> """Now that both HTTP extensions and HTTP/1.1 are stable specifications,
> W3C has closed the HTTP Activity. The Activity has achieved its goals of
> creating a successful standard that addresses the weaknesses of earlier
> HTTP versions."""
> My question is then simple? Is there any plan to update HTTP after almost
> 6 years its last specification has been issued?
> As naive as it may sound, the last few years have shown that HTTP was not
> alsways either understood or clear enough on some topics. To name a few:
> * The lack of clear separation between an HTTP status code and the header
> sent along the response
> * The endless issue about the idempotency or not of HTTP methods
> * The real usability of pipelinig (today's networks are not onmes of 10
> years ago)
> * The usability of 100-Continue
> * Is the Accept header efficient
> I believe there are more issues of course.
> Now some might say these are minor problems and do not require a new WG
> process and this is certainly true (I'm a simple hacker with little
> knowledge of how the W3 internally works). However I felt intrigued to
> know if there were even "corridor discussions" on that matter :)
> Intrigued because HTTP has been becoming more and more heavily used
> (internet connections are getting cheaper, globalization of companies with
> offices all around the World, the recent success of REST and technologies
> such as Ajax) and it sounds like a good time to me clarify blurry topics.
> Anyway, just to know if there was any life around HTTP these days.
> Regards,
> - Sylvain
> http://www.defuze.org

-Harry Maugans
Penguin Studios, Inc.
Received on Friday, 12 May 2006 20:33:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:33:06 UTC