W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1997

Changes to the spec

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 19:00:17 -0800
Message-Id: <11352BDEEB92CF119F3F00805F14F4850427D358@red-44-msg.dns.microsoft.com>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/4784
Let me state my agreement with Jim Gettys, Larry Masinter, and Roy Fielding
on the issue of changes being made to the HTTP/1.1 proposed draft.

The proposed draft is the standard.  Any changes we are making should only
be to fix known problems and should only be done in a way such that RFC 2068
compliant programs will remain compliant with the draft version of the

This means that all new optional features, such as Accept-TE, do not get
included in the draft standard.

This means that any features that are not backwards compatible, such as
changing basic auth syntax or putting in more than 3 digit error codes, with
RFC 2068 do not get included in the draft standard.

This means that any features that have not been independently implemented by
at least two vendors do not get included in the draft standard.

Moving from Proposed to Draft is not a chance to put in new features that we
now realize are useful based on our experience with RFC 2068.  This is only
a chance to fix known problems, in a backwards compatible way.  If you want
to add a new optional feature, write up an RFC and put it on standards
track.  If you want to put in a new mandatory feature or change expected
protocol behavior then rev the protocol number.  But if a proposed change
fails any of the previous three tests then it has no business being put into
the draft standard.

Received on Thursday, 20 November 1997 19:01:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:16:28 UTC