W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: #421: Mixed Schemes

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 05:57:37 -0700
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <9410B145-AE5B-42BB-AFF1-776E7D76082F@gbiv.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
On Apr 1, 2014, at 5:43 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> Is the specific problem you're pointing out to do with the phrase "the semantics of requests for non-HTTP schemes is not defined in this document"?
> 
> The text you mention is quite brief, and doesn't define any requirements for handling other schemes (or not); it's just a very high-level state of intent regarding the protocol's capabilities -- not a constraint.

The whole paragraph seems confused to me.  The semantics of a request
are defined by the request method and header fields.  The URI specifically
has no request semantics.  The comment assumes that http and https are
the only relevant schemes, which just plain ignores the proxy use case
described in HTTP/1.1.  1.1 doesn't need special requirements for that,
since support for non-http(s) schemes is inherent to the interface
provided by HTTP for absolute URIs.

....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2014 12:58:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:29 UTC