- From: Daniel DuBois <dan@spyglass.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:38:04 -0700
- To: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
At 05:09 PM 10/10/96 +0200, Koen Holtman wrote: >some HTML form hacks would be needed to provide the same level of downwards >compatibility with existing browsers that Safe can provide, for example > > <form action="..." method=post preferred_method=get-with-body> > .... > </form>. >So it boils down to cruft in HTTP vs. cruft in HTML. Aren't proxies disallowed from forwarding methods they don't understand? Wouldn't GETWITHBODY require a HTTP/1.2 (or rather, a 1.3, since servers would be forced to accept it in 1.2, but clients would need to not send it until 1.3, ala FullURL)? Safe: yes could be sent today. ----- Daniel DuBois I travel, I code, I'm a Traveling Coderman http://www.spyglass.com/~ddubois/
Received on Thursday, 10 October 1996 08:52:12 UTC