- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 20:04:12 +0200
- To: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
On 14.05.2019 19:54, Tommy Pauly wrote: > Hello all, > > As with #781 on SH, we've had some discussion back and forth on this one, without clearly concluding the discussion. > > We'd like to get a sense of the group's consensus so we can move forward with the document. Please reply with which option you think will be be best option to be able to ship the document: > > A. Leave the document as-is, without specifying a URI type for SH; note that URI types can be added in a future revision > B. Specify a URI type for SH as a String > > Thanks, > Tommy (chair hat on) My preference is B, in particular if we also allow non-tokens as identifiers in parametrized lists (because then we could express the Link header field as SH). Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2019 18:04:42 UTC