W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2003


From: Scott Lawrence <scott@skrb.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:50:27 -0500 (EST)
To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m3oev0pcdn.fsf@kathmandu.pingtel.com>

Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com> writes:

>> the issue here is that the "OPTIONS *" request in reality get's
>> never passed to the various 'modules' inside a server that would
>> need to be able to respond it (for instance neither Apache/mod_dav
>> nor Tomcat/Webdav servlet set the special "DAV:" response header
>> defined for OPTIONS in RFC2518).
>> Any chance to get that onto the RFC2616 issues list?
> In my experience, you need to convince one of the original authors or
> anybody Scott Lawrence trusts that a certain change is warranted. If
> you succeed, the change will be posted to
> http://purl.org/NET/http-errata with a link to the discussion on the
> list.

> The change does not have to be an "errata" or "issue" with the
> protocol itself.

But it helps...

> Your best bet is probably to post a specific wording to this list and
> wait for a reaction.

Specific text is essential - I'd suggest some form of exactly what
text you would replace with exactly what it should become, because
it's the only way to get it reviewed.  Don't wait long - to quote from
the errata page:

   New drafts of [RFCs 2616 & 2617] are being prepared now,
   incorporating all of the following corrections, in preparation for
   requesting that they be advanced to full Standard status. If you
   have an issue with any of these resolutions, or if you think that
   you've found another, you should post it to the HTTP Working Group
   list and get the issue discussed there as soon as possible.

Scott Lawrence        
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2003 13:58:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:24 UTC