- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 18:22:41 -0800
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> I don't think that 'logical completeness' is a useful criteria for us > to use in the decision of "does this go in HTTP/1.1 or put off for an > extension or a later version". I'll disagree with you there. I think logical completeness is an important part of any proposed standard, and I tend to oppose any change until the change is complete. > My reason for suggesting that DELETE, TRACE and WRAPPED not be in 1.1 > is my perception that > 1) there are likely to be disagreements about their form (pure > conjecture) I claim that they are innocent until proven flammable. > 2) we've not discussed them (hypermail pointer to > discussion/consensus about these in our mail archive?) DELETE -> Why discuss it? There is no controversy about it. TRACE -> http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/hypermail/1995q4/0404.html with complete resolution of Max-Forwards proposal in http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/hypermail/1995q4/0405.html That was one of the most peaceful debates we've had on any feature. :) WRAPPED -> Part of Dave Kristol's original extension proposal, with additions from myself and Rohit (for PEP). I am not sure whether this qualifies or not. > 3) there are no current implementations (pointers to existing > implementations and their docuemntation?) DELETE is implemented in libwww-perl. Of course, since I designed it to be extensible, I can implement any method in libwww-perl in less than 10 minutes. I guess what you are looking for is a server implementation, and I don't think that will happen until TRACE is in the proposed standard. However, if necessary, I'll spend some time implementing it for Apache. > 4) the form that these operations exist in within the HTTP/1.1 > specification has not had adequate review (list of HTTP-WG members who > claim to have reviewed these sections carefully?) That is not a valid question. Had you formed a subgroup to do that, there obviously would have been an "adequate review". As it stands, I have had no objections from anyone, inside or outside the WG, regarding those methods (aside from the brief discussion of TRACE, which was resolved to everyone's satisfaction). I can live without WRAPPED, but removing TRACE and DELETE will create more controversy than you seek to avoid by removing them. ......Roy
Received on Friday, 23 February 1996 18:29:55 UTC