- From: Roy Fielding <fielding@beach.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 18:05:01 -0400
- To: Lou Montulli <montulli@mozilla.com>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
>Great, pragma's can now be interpreted I'm happy. Should
>I still interpret "no-cache" or should there be something else?
Yes, and I'll update the specs [I wish we had this discussion before
I split them in two].
>While we are on the subject it would be nice to have a header
>that specified the level of privacy of a document.
Yikes! Then we have to define "level of privacy" first, and I
don't think this belongs in a Pragma header anyway.
The W3C security people have been working on a generic extension
mechanism for this purpose (and a few others) which should be
a proposal for HTTP/1.2 once the documentation is complete.
I'd like to get 1.0 set in stone first, before we open the mondo
can-o-worms that generic extensions will entail.
....Roy T. Fielding Department of ICS, University of California, Irvine USA
Visiting Scholar, MIT/LCS + World-Wide Web Consortium
(fielding@w3.org) (fielding@ics.uci.edu)
Received on Wednesday, 16 August 1995 15:05:47 UTC