- From: William F. Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:55:51 -0500 (EST)
- To: www-talk@www10.w3.org
If we are following written rules, it seems obvious to me that Section
3.1 of RFC 1945 (HTTP 1.0) [quoted below] must govern the meaning
of the first line.
I think that is what Roy said.
The 1.1 draft that I have seen could be clearer on this.
-- Bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Short excerpt from RFC 1945 follows
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Network Working Group T. Berners-Lee
Request for Comments: 1945 MIT/LCS
Category: Informational R. Fielding
UC Irvine
H. Frystyk
MIT/LCS
May 1996
Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0
----------
. . .
----------
3.1 HTTP Version
HTTP uses a "<major>.<minor>" numbering scheme to indicate versions
of the protocol. The protocol versioning policy is intended to allow
the sender to indicate the format of a message and its capacity for
understanding further HTTP communication, rather than the features
obtained via that communication. No change is made to the version
number for the addition of message components which do not affect
communication behavior or which only add to extensible field values.
The <minor> number is incremented when the changes made to the
protocol add features which do not change the general message parsing
algorithm, but which may add to the message semantics and imply
additional capabilities of the sender. The <major> number is
incremented when the format of a message within the protocol is
changed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 14 January 1997 10:56:28 UTC