- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 05:42:55 +0000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <0168B53E-A4CB-41BA-B371-7499837A327E@mnot.net>, Mark Nottingham writes: ><https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/227> > >After some discussion in Berlin and Stockholm, as well as experience >with dealing with i18n in parameters for the Link header (see ><https://github.com/mnot/I-D/issues/180>), I think we should give more >definite advice about when RFC5987(bis) encoding should and should not >be used. I have an almost done ID for the "common structure" idea I floated after Stockholm. That could be a more general solution to this problem. -- 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 Wednesday, 28 September 2016 05:43:23 UTC