- From: Erik Wilde <erik.wilde@dret.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 21:48:35 -0400
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
hello martin.
On 2018-08-29 18:50, Martin Thomson wrote:
> I have a slight preference for taking this through the WG process, but
> only because I think that is always better than AD sponsorship. That
> said, after looking at the content, these are well-written and simple
> enough that any process they take should only be brief.
thanks, and of course i'd be happy to do it either way. if there's
anything i can do to help decide which way to go, please let me know.
> Seeing the proliferation of new link relations at around the same time
> as new Prefer labels makes me wonder if we need a new "Prefer:
> meta=minimal/full" option so that all that extra stuff can be
> suppressed. At some point header compression isn't good enough to
> hold back the flood.
good point. although my expectation (and the current uses i have seen)
is to see the link relations being used in content much more than in
header fields. but of course you never know what will actually happen
over time.
thanks and cheers,
dret.
--
erik wilde | mailto:erik.wilde@dret.net |
| http://dret.net/netdret |
| http://twitter.com/dret |
Received on Thursday, 30 August 2018 13:03:19 UTC