- From: Ned Freed <NED@innosoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 23:07:43 -0800 (PST)
- To: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
- Cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> My point was that people should be aware that changes which break > existing commercial implementations would require a *very compelling > argument*. I do not find the arguments so far to be that compelling > and I have no vested interest in current implementations. I suspect > those with investment in current implementations will also not find > the arguments sufficiently compelling. This is all fine and dandy, but since the arguments so far have only been in support of changes that are completely compatible with the existing specification, why even bother with this point? Ned
Received on Thursday, 22 February 1996 23:13:40 UTC