- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:14:15 +0000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <8467DC8F-2F8A-4F71-8C70-547716EB9088@mnot.net>, Mark Nottingham wri tes: >This is a detailed work plan, not a way to find agreement on an approach >(which is what many people -- including you -- have said they want). It absolutely is, but I find that it is a much better idea to write abstract based on concrete, than the other way around. The reason why I responded with my list is that I did not read your proposed charter as supporting getting from the A we have to the B we, or at least I, want. In particular there was no mention of formalizing the semantics/transport split that gave me an indication that this was to even be a, and certainly not *the*, major goal. To me, your charter sounds like the httpbis WG will graft a single new transport protocol onto HTTP/1.1bis and call it HTTP/2.0. If I can read it that way, I leve to your imagination what headline ComputerWorld will put on it. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Friday, 10 February 2012 11:14:41 UTC