Re: http methods

• From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
• Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:21:13 +0200
• To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
• CC: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <520DEF09.2020808@gmx.de>

On 2013-08-13 12:54, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <520A0F06.5090901@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes:
>
>> Removing uncommon methods doesn't simplify HTTP any more then removing
>> uncommon status codes or header fields.
>
> Can you please explain what the word "simplify" means to you ?
>
> If ditching a load of unnecessary bells and whistles reduces the
> size of the specification by 10%, it would clearly count as a
> simplification where I come from.

We were talking about extension methods. These are not part of the base 
specification. They do not contribute to the size of the spec.

And no, the size of the specification is not a good measure for the 
complexity of a protocol.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Friday, 16 August 2013 09:21:46 UTC