- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 20:19:34 +0200
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 02.05.2019 19:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > -------- > In message <20190502174129.GF32325@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes: > >> I think that the opposition against support of empty values only came >>from an almost inexistent need at a moment [...] > > As far as I could tell, that was a completely nonexistent need, but > to me it matters little if we are trying to generalize from only > one example or from no example at all. > > And please remember that SH is a meta-specification, a specification > to write other specifications with. > > If a documented use case appears and a concensus for how to meet > its needs can be found, publishing a SHbis will not hurt anybody, > or create any compatibility issues since the specs that references > SHorig are not changed by SHbiss mere existence. Hmm. So do yo envision implementers to have multiple code paths for SH, SHbis, SHbisbis??? Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2019 18:20:29 UTC