Re: Moving forward with HTTP/2.0: proposed charter

Julian,

On 8/4/12 1:12 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Does taking SPDY as a base imply that what we'll be doing is a delta
> spec to HTTP/1.1, essentially adding one new TCP binding /
> serialization, and potentially some new options?
>
> In that case I believe we should plan to maintain the HTTP/1.1 specs;
> both incorporating fixes for errata, and also doing editorial
> improvements so that the existing bits integrate well with the new stuff.
>
> That would mean that we revise HTTPbis in parallel, and submit it for
> Full Standard at the same time the HTTP/2.0 go to Proposed.
>

The alternative would be to do something like what we did in Calsify
where we respecified ALL of the primitives in what was a major cleanup. 
That's not necessary here.  Arguably 2.0 doesn't even update 2616, let
alone obsolete it.

Eliot

Received on Saturday, 4 August 2012 11:38:33 UTC