- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 21:21:58 PDT
- To: dan@spyglass.com
- Cc: dwm@shell.portal.com, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
It is completely against the principles of IETF standards that the process of arriving at "rough consensus" could result in threatening to slap "uncompliant" on someone publicly. It's a rather empty power-trip. Besides, there are ample examples of situations where a HTTP/1.1 compliant application (not necessarily a browser) might implement one kind of authentication and not another. There's no first-principled reason to brand THOSE applications uncompliant in a quest for some kind of marketing press release. No thanks, Larry
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 1996 21:24:06 UTC