On Aug 4, 2012 5:27 PM, "Mike Belshe" <mike@belshe.com> wrote: > > > [Snip] >> >> Work will begin using draft-mbelshe-httpbis-spdy-00 as a starting point; proposals are to be expressed in terms of changes to that document. Note that consensus is required both for changes to the document and anything that remains in the document. >> >> $Because something is in the initial document does not imply that there is consensus around the feature or how it is specified.$ > > > I think this was already covered by "consensus is required both for changes to the document and anything that remains in the document". > >> >> >> $The outcome of this WG is HTTP/2.0, not SPDY. It is important that there is no confusion about the relationship between HTTP/2.0 and SPDY as we do not want to have dueling specifications in this area.$ > > > There are no dueling specifications. This working group is working on HTTP/2.0. We can say it again, but it probably doesn't decrease the paranoia ;-) > The paranoia is well justified I think given how other notable specs have developed recently. I think it would be great to know if the existing SPDY folks are intending to continue parallel development on SPDY or go all in working on http 2.0. - James
Received on Sunday, 5 August 2012 00:41:41 UTC