Re: draft-holtman-http-safe-01.txt

Larry Masinter:
>
>> The Safe response header solves _some_ of the problems we have because we
>> don't have GET-WITH-BODY.  Once we GET-WITH-BODY is deployed though, Safe
>> becomes superfluous.
>> 
>> So it is Safe now, GET-WITH-BODY later.
>> 
>
>I think this is a dangerous strategy for standards track in the IETF,
>and
>I think we should approach any feature that is designed to be
>superfluous later
>with great suspicion.

I proposed Safe to quicky solve a deployment problem for RFC2070.  It is a
bug fix, not a new feature.  If there had been more contacts between the
http-wg and the i18n group before both drafts went to last call, we would
not have had this deployment problem in the first place.

Please see my internet draft for a longer discussion of this issue.

>Larry

Koen.