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

Re: Other work items

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:01:03 +0200
Message-ID: <539BF32F.4080309@gmx.de>
To: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2014-06-13 23:50, Matthew Kerwin wrote:
>
> On 14 June 2014 05:00, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net
> <mailto:mnot@mnot.net>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Julian,
>
>     On 12 Jun 2014, at 4:55 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de
>     <mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de>> wrote:
>      >
>      > There are also other things to think about for future HTTP work,
>     such as, in no particular order:
>      >
>
> ​[...]​
>
>      > - addressing the C-E/Range Request issue
>
>     That needs a draft and a serious amount of discussion on-list first;
>     two hours in a room in Toronto are not going to move it
>     significantly forward if we don’t have those first.
>
>     Is anyone writing a draft here?
>
>
> I'm thinking about it
> , but I'm not​
> ​ sure what approach to take. I have the start of a h2 extension-based
> draft here, but that's only the tip of the iceberg.>

As this is a HTTP/1.1 problem as well, the right solution IMHO is define 
a new range unit (bytes-before-content-coding).

>      > - common header field syntax (JSON?)
>
>     This is VERY speculative (although I have thought about it too). I-D?
>
>
> Or perhaps revisiting draft-snell-httpbis-bohe.

Again, this was about HTTP in general.

> ...

Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 14 June 2014 07:01:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC