- From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 22:00:42 -0800
- To: 'Henrik Frystyk Nielsen' <frystyk@w3.org>, Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu>, koen@win.tue.nl
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Nothing like defining current implementations as broken to really get companies excited about the open standards process. "Be standards compliant" I said. "It's an RFC" I said. Sigh... Yaron > -----Original Message----- > From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen [SMTP:frystyk@w3.org] > Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 1998 11:28 AM > To: Foteos Macrides; koen@win.tue.nl > Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com > Subject: Re: MUST use Content-Base > > At 12:49 1/7/98 -0500, Foteos Macrides wrote: > > > If there is at lease one other client besides Lynx which has > >implemented it, I do not think that it should be deleted. The > requirement > >is for "two independent implementations" ;( NOT "implementation by two > >major commercial clients", though they both should implement it to be > >HTTP/1.1 compliant ); > > Libwww [1] does it as well, so I think we are all set :) > > Henrik > > [1] http://www.w3.org/Library/ > -- > Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, > World Wide Web Consortium > http://www.w3.org/People/Frystyk
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 1998 22:04:50 UTC