- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 00:45:31 PDT
- To: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Cc: lawrence@agranat.com, yarong@microsoft.com, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
> Larry, I think your account here is a very skewed representation of > history: I'm sorry, my hasty note wasn't meant to be a representation of history, but a representation of the line of reasoning that would lead one to believe that 'dynamic content' might actually be the 'right' way to do what TCN is trying to do. Perhaps it is a specious argument, but you should consider seriously whether the real world cases for actual content negotiation can actually be satisfied by the simplified conditionals available in TCN; we have at least one vendor who says "no, it's not adequate, dynamic content is better." The point of 'running code' is not merely to demonstrate 'can this be implemented?' but also 'is it effective, when implemented, in satisfying the requirements?' Unfortunately, we don't have a separate document laying out what the requirements ARE, and different individuals have different intuitions about this. Thus, there are some differing assumptions between those trying to evaluate the proposal. Yaron has taken the point of view that after evaluating the requirements that his company hears from their customers, that "dynamic content" is a better solution to those sets of problems. Others, who most likely have different customers, may disagree, but perhaps not because they disagree on the technical evaluation but rather that they are trying to address a different set of requirements. > I don't see this progression to a turing complete language. The problem is that it *isn't* a turing-complete language, so you can't write arbitrary programs to determine content. > If Microsoft decides that they want to do negotiation only with > scripting languages, this implies that they want to provide an > infrastructure for content `best negotiated with MSIE'. In the real world, there are more deployed implementations of Java and JavaScript (running on different platforms) than there are deployed implementations of TCN, so this is hardly a 'best negotiated with MSIE' case. Larry -- http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter
Received on Thursday, 29 May 1997 00:48:52 UTC