- From: Jason Crawford <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 01:08:19 -0500
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@ebuilt.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org, "'WebDAV'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 04:15:23PM -0500, Jason Crawford wrote: > > Roy, > > > In other words, I think that "scheme:" is only a valid identifier for the > > namespace if the scheme defines it as such. > > What are you suggesting here? Where would a scheme define it as such? > > Would this require a change to 2396 that you'd support? Or some place > > else? > If two or more independent implementations are doing something with the > protocol that is not allowed by the RFC, and rough consensus within the > working group is that those implementations are doing no harm, then the > protocol specification should change to accommodate them. Whatever change > is made to 2396 will have to also take into account the history of > existing implementations. > > That doesn't mean it will change any time soon, but we can add it to the > list of errata, which I need to compile anyway. Then it sounds to me like we have enough resolution of this for me to log it on the webdav issues list as temporarily resolved, and to note that it should be revisited again in a year to insure that the change in 2396 actually can be counted on. Any problems with this? J.
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2001 01:15:24 UTC