- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2014 11:29:44 +1100
- To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 1 Feb 2014, at 9:20 pm, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote: > On 01 Feb 2014, at 05:25, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > >> whether the MAY ought to be a SHOULD; i.e., when possible, clients are encouraged > > There is a wide spectrum between MAY (whatever you want) and SHOULD (you really have to have one of the following documented reasons not to). This strikes me as a quality of implementation expectation, not an interoperability mandate, so maybe wording with “clients are encouraged” is actually appropriate. We've used SHOULD to encourage behaviour with good network effects / social benefit before -- e.g., sending caching metadata. Personally, I think this falls in the same bucket; the client's behaviour here has strong impact on the network and server (indeed, the network impact is one of the major reasons we're doing /2). Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 2 February 2014 00:30:18 UTC