- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:37:30 -0800
- To: 'www-tag@w3.org' <www-tag@w3.org>
We nuked this due to under-cookedness. I'm sympathetic to Ian's point, so I've shaken & stirred the existing language slightly; I understand the date is very late, but if lots of TAG members write back and say "yes" maybe it could squeeze in: =============================================================== The "https" scheme [RFC2818] is an example of a URI scheme that, though commonly implemented by agents, is problematic; it does not differ from "http" except that it indicates that agents should expect to use HTTP over TLS when dereferencing these URIs. However, HTTP agents can negotiate a secure exchange whatever the URI scheme, so the scheme did not provide missing functionality. Changes in the security policy for a resource identified by an "https" URI may require publication of a new non-https URI. Security policy management can be managed without requiring URIs to change; see the section on URI persistence for more information.
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2003 12:43:00 UTC