- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 19:05:36 -0700
- To: marc@ckm.ucsf.edu
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> from minutes, HTTP Working Group, IETF June 96, Montreal
> |Aug 1: (Leach) draft on sticky headers, short names for headers, and
>
>Can short names for headers (Good Idea) be compatible with existing practice in
>HTTP/1.x or must it wait until 2.x? Does allowing aliases for the names of the
>header fields alter the general message parsing algorithm or message semantics
>as specified in 3.1 of HTTP/1.1?
Yes, it does -- changing existing header field names (i.e., short names or
tokenizing) can only be done in HTTP/2.x. Besides, it doesn't make any
sense to introduce short names now when the GOAL should be a multiplexed
and tokenized grammar for HTTP/2.0, and that can be accomplished in six
months if people don't waste their time on minor tweaks that are equally
incompatible with 1.x.
...Roy T. Fielding
Department of Information & Computer Science (fielding@ics.uci.edu)
University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-3425 fax:+1(714)824-4056
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 1996 19:12:48 UTC