- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 14:40:36 +1100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: member-accesscontrol-tf@w3.org, public-appformats@w3.org
There's informal, unofficial activity (disclaimer: I'm one of the instigators) on the HTTP WG list to revise RFC2616, but the stated intent is to get a WG and make it formal. See: <http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/> Cheers, On 2007/02/15, at 9:53 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:12:36 +0100, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo- > inc.com> wrote: >> Can you change to ABNF? If the HTTP changes go through, it's >> likely to be to ABNF, not EBNF, since that's the IETF's preferred >> flavour. > > What do you mean with "If the HTTP changes go through [...]"? > > > -- > Anne van Kesteren > <http://annevankesteren.nl/> > <http://www.opera.com/> -- Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 03:41:17 UTC