W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1996

Re: Summary of opinions on Negotiate header

From: <jg@zorch.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 96 10:36:12 -0400
Message-Id: <9609261436.AA21642@zorch.w3.org>
To: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
Cc: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1641
I agree with the sentiment that HTTP/1.X is a human readable protocol, and
should be kept so in its current incarnation....  
We'll revisit this whole problem with a binary
encoding someday, and the sins of HTTP are already massive in this area.

However, if there are two equally good names for a header, and
one is shorter, pick the shorter.  And think a bit to see if a good
short name occurs to you.  Similarly for the encoding of values.
Remember that on a 14.4 modem, a character
costs you of order a half a millisecond; the milliseconds add up
quickly at that rate (and people use the Web at even slower speeds;
cellular telephone technology makes that look fast).  Human perception
is in the 30 millisecond range, and people start thinking things are
slow when you get into 10ths of seconds.  The bulk of web usage
today is dialup, at 14.4 or up to 28.8K baud, not the speeds
most of us use in the office.
				- Jim
Received on Thursday, 26 September 1996 07:51:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:16:20 UTC