- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:01:18 +1100
- To: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
- Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 11 February 2015 at 14:14, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com> wrote: > Um, with all due respect HTTP/1.1 is a Proposed Standard with a lot of years of deployment, while HTTP/2.0 is *almost* a Draft Standard. Why are we talking about "a deprecated 1.x"? Well... We're headed for "Proposed Standard", which is the same status as HTTP/1.1, so from a process standpoint they will be on equal footing. But there is no question that HTTP/1.1 is far more mature and interoperable. My interpretation is that 1.1 hasn't advanced to Draft or Full Standard is some combination of conservatism and a general unwillingness to do the necessary busywork, but I'm sure that Julian would have a more precise answer since I always tune out during those conversations. You are probably reading too much into the language people use though. Many of us here simply want to use HTTP/2 for all the reasons that we decided to work on it and implement it.
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 05:01:45 UTC