- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 09:55:50 +0000
- To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
- cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <579F0952.4030607@tzi.org>, Carsten Bormann writes: >Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> My personal intuition was that we should find a binary serialization >> (like CORS), > >I'm assuming here you mean CBOR? Sorry yes, not enough tea yet... >Once a bespoke design of a data model and serialization is completed, >that is likely to be as complicated as CBOR (or even more). Not if we follow the datamodel I proposed. >The real problem is then that we have added another data model and >serialization of that data model to the overall complexity that needs to >be managed by a system that connects to the web. Well, the problem is that if we do not add a common datamodel, each and every new header brings its own. And by basing the datamodel on the existing HTTP(1) header syntax, we would not need to base64 encode a binary format in HTTP1 -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 1 August 2016 09:56:18 UTC