- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 01 Dec 1994 18:16:43 -0800
- To: Chuck Shotton <cshotton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>
- Cc: Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@cs.indiana.edu>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Chuck Shotton writes:
> IMHO, it should state that CR, LF, and CRLF should all be interpreted
> equally as EOL when used as line ends. This avoids any problems with
> machine dependent EOL symbols, and fairly represents the current practice.
> (It also avoids forcing clients and especially servers to do line-by-line
> translations of EOL for all outgoing response information, which is a BIG
> performance hit.)
Sounds reasonable to me.
......Roy Fielding ICS Grad Student, University of California, Irvine USA
<fielding@ics.uci.edu>
<URL:http://www.ics.uci.edu/dir/grad/Software/fielding>
Received on Thursday, 1 December 1994 18:18:25 UTC