- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:53:36 +1000
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Thanks to everyone who replied. It looks like there are a number of implementations who are interested in this, so let's include it in our next implementation draft. Martin, please incorporate it, but mark the section(s) as AT RISK, and leave the issue open. Cheers, On 18 Apr 2014, at 4:37 pm, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > There's been a lot of discussion of this issue, but (predictably) no more data. > > As indicated earlier, I think the best way to decide about this proposal is to get some operational experience with it, and one way to do that is to include it in the next implementation draft with a note to the effect that it's an "at risk" feature -- i.e. we'll pull it in the next draft if we don't agree to keep it in NYC. > > Please comment on this in the next ~3 days; if we don't hear convincing arguments as to why this is a bad idea, we'll follow that plan. > > Regards, > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2014 07:54:01 UTC