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

Re: GOAWAY -> GTFO

From: Simon Yarde <simonyarde@me.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 16:42:24 +0000
Message-id: <77EBCD26-A382-4B58-95FA-A3F5D4E66EC8@me.com>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
This issue as I see it is not that non-native English speakers won't get the joke;  it is that course humour is disrespectful to the work being done.

Um.. it was an 'April Fool'. And yes it is part of 'a' protocol, but not 'the' HTTP protocol. At least it was non-offensive.

> 2. HTCPCP Protocol
> 
> 
>    The HTCPCP protocol is built on top of HTTP,

I think matters have rightly moved along now.

Simon Yarde



On 29 Jan 2014, at 16:25, CIURANA EUGENE (pr3d4t0r) <pr3d4t0r.w3c@cime.net> wrote:

>  
> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Adrian Cole <adrian.f.cole@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> FWIW, when GTFO was suggested last week at the working group, all people
> >>> present had an opportunity to dissent and I heard not a single dissent
> >>> voiced!
> >>> 
> >>> That said, I wouldn't conflate above PR/commit as a "popular move" as who
> >>> knows.. GOAWAY might actually lose a popular vote vs GTFO!
> >>> 
> >>> That said, silencing the argument is likely a popular move, so maybe the
> >>> description still fits.
> 
> 
> I expressed this in the GitHub comments about the issue, echoing it here as well because this mailing list has a wider audience.
> 
> Use of GTFO is fine.  Anyone arguing that because foreign speakers may not understand potential slang is being na´ve or needs to get out more.  I've managed development teams in Moscow, Novosibirsk, Kiev, the San Francisco Bay Area, London, and Japan.  The use of slang or jargon derived from English in technical documentation, implementations, code, or configuration has never deterred anybody from applying the appropriate knowledge.  GOAWAY vs. GTFO -- if I were to implement a server or a client handler for this, I'd go for GTFO as the most meaningful (and perhaps get a secret chuckle, sure).
> 
> So -- can we keep this instead?  Think of HTTP status code 418 IMATEAPOT (which is Russian slang for "I don't know what I'm doing").  Not many web servers or app servers implement it, granted, but it's part of the official spec.  And I've known teams in the US and Europe who've used 418 as a placeholder for an app RESTful handler that is only mocked up/yet to be implemented.
> 
> Just my $0,02.
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> E
> -- 
> http://eugeneciurana.com | http://ciurana.eu
> 
>  
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 16:42:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:23 UTC