- From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:52:46 +0000
- To: Public MWBP <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Jo and I discussed this on the phone the other day so this note is a) to remind him of that conversation; b) alert other members of the group to the issue. We have discussed the potential usefulness of the HTTP Link Header in the mobile space in past meetings (I recall doing so most recently at TPAC last year). The issue continues to surface and resurface on the IETF/W3C HTTP group and has lead to some very recent and extensive discussion. Happy Halpin kicked things off this time [1] and this lead to mark Nottingham breathing new life into his draft [2]. I chimed in with the POWDER use case [3]. In between these are messages from the likes of Roy Fielding and Julian Reschke. The bulk of the discussion centred on the need for/best approach to providing an HTTP Profile header, i.e. an extensible and unambiguous way to extend relationship types. It's not as easy as it sounds... If the MWBP in general, and the CTTF in particular, wishes to support the reinstatement of HTTP Link and comment on the wider discussion. NOW is the time when such an input can have most effect. Cheers Phil. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2008JanMar/0444.html [2] http://www.mnot.net/drafts/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-01.txt [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2008JanMar/0499.html
Received on Monday, 17 March 2008 09:53:29 UTC