- From: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 10:57:48 -0700
- To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Subject (and abstract) says pretty much it all. Varous forms of the document available off of the issues list page. For those of you involved in drafting text, the easiest way to review they were incorporated properly is if you can use Microsoft Word 97; if you can, there are comments attached to each change in the document, and hyperlinks from the comments back to the issues list to make your reviews easier. By my count, there are ~20 issues of all sorts still to be completed (out of 82 in the current count). Most have almost all of the solutiondone for them. Lets see how many we can reach closure on before Munich, shall we? I don't plan to read mail again before Monday. Gotta teak a break after the push to get the draft out. I'll see many of you in Munich. Your editor, - Jim Gettys Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 Abstract The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application- level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information systems. It is a generic, stateless, object- oriented protocol which can be used for many tasks, such as name servers and distributed object management systems, through extension of its request methods. A feature of HTTP is the typing and negotiation of data representation, allowing systems to be built independently of the data being transferred. HTTP has been in use by the World-Wide Web global information initiative since 1990. This specification defines the protocol referred to as "HTTP/1.1". The issues list for HTTP/1.1 can be found at: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/Issues/. This draft does not resolve all open issues in the HTTP/1.1 specification requiring closure before HTTP/1.1 goes to draft standard. It does, however, close most of them, and note where in the document there are still significant issues under discussion. The best way to view this document is to get a copy of the Word 97 document found at: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/diff-v11- RFC2068to08.doc; all issues are noted as comments in the source document, with hyperlinks to the Issues list. The most significant outstanding issue is OPTIONS; there is a separate internet draft on the topic that you should review NOT incorporated into this draft (though editorial notes identify where changes may occur). This draft is draft-ietf-http-options-00.txt. Also an issue: AGE-CALCULATION; Roy Fielding has issued an ID on the topic; Jeff Mogul intends to issue a draft as well. The editorial group is very interested in feedback on the sample table of requirements in this draft (issue REQUIREMENTS, section 1.9). Is it useful? How could it be improved? Open or drafting issues not incorporated into this draft include: REDIRECTS, ENCODING-NOT-CONNEG, DATE_IF_MODIFIED, 403VS404, PUT-RANGE, HOST, AGE-CALCULATION, RE- AUTHENTICATION-REQUESTED, VARY Issues incorporated into this draft where there is still controversy are noted in bold italic with an editor's note. These are issues: CONTENT-ENCODING, CACHING-CGI. Issues incorporated into this draft being working group last called are: AUTH-CHUNKED, RETRY-AFTER, PROXY-REDIRECT Closed issues incorporated into this draft include: PROXY- AUTHORIZATION, PROXY-LENGTH, LANGUAGE-TAG, TSPECIALS, STATUS100, QZERO, RANGE-ERROR, CLARIFY-NO-CACHE, COMMENT, CONTENT-LOCATION, QUOTED-BACK, CACHE-CONTRA, CACHE- DIRECTIVE, BYTE-RANGE, LWS-DELIMITER, CRLF, MAX-AGE, 100DATE, DISPOSITION, CHUNKED, CACHING, WARNINGS, VERSION, PROXY-MAXAGE, CHARSET-WILDCARD, PADDING, CONNECTION, RANGES, WARNING-8859, SHOULD-8859, X-BYTERANGES, MULTIPLE-TRANSFER- CODINGS, LINK_HEADER. Editorial issues still open include: CLEANUP, UTF-8, URL-SYNTAX, ENTITY, DOCKDIGEST, 1310_CACHE. Editorial issues closed include: ACCEPT-RANGES, KEEP-ALIVE, BNFNAME, KEYWORDS, RESPONSE-VERSION, XREF, COMMON-HEADERS, NO-CACHE, FIX-REF, PERSIST-CONFUSED, CONNECTION2, GMT-UTC, PROXY-FORWARD, REFERER-SEC, CHUNK-EXT, REMOVE_19.6, IDEMPOTENT, REF-SIGCOMM, 1521-OBSOLETE, MESSAGE-BODY Apologies for the extreme length; Microsoft Word exhibited a fatal bug whenever trying to adjust margins when converting to ascii text; therefore, the margins are extreme and the document very long in ascii. Get the Postscript version off the Issues list!
Received on Thursday, 31 July 1997 11:04:17 UTC