Re: Dissemination of HTTP-NG info [was: hmmm]

On Thu, 12 Mar 1998, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

> At 23:23 3/11/98 -0700, Marc Slemko wrote:
> Marc Slemko <>, Dan Connolly <>
> >I don't think that the development of HTTP-NG is not being done in a
> >reasonable way (note the double negative); I can't think that because I
> >have nothing to base such a viewpoint on.  In the absence of more
> >information, and knowing who is involved, I can only guess that it is more
> >or less reasonable. 
> I am very distressed about this. We have had extensive discussions on this
> with several people from the the Apache group with cc to
> <> on all my respones. However, I can't find them in
> the archives from neither January, February, nor March 1998:

They are in:      

> so my only conclusion is that as I am not subscribed to the mailing list
> then the mails have not gone through to the list.

Of course, it is an open list.  Somewhere on there
are notes about how to subscribe.  You probably wouldn't want to though,
unless you like lots of mail.  Posting is restricted from non-subscribers,
but you are on the list of others who can post. 

> Would it be possible for me to subscribe the Apache mailing list so that we
> can avoid this confusion in the future?
> It is very unfortunate and I believe a great waste of everybody's time - we
> should have made much more progress in our common understanding by now, so
> let me point out the main issues here again:
>    - No, you do *not* have to pay 50K to follow the NG project.

Right.  That is not at all clear from the information on the web, but is
what I have come to understand.

>    - No, you do *not* have to sign up for 50% of your time to follow either.
>      We have a separate mailing list (interest group) for discusssions and
>      comments on the rough working drafts that the Working Groups produce.

Exactly how is a non-W3C member supposed to sign up for this "interest
group"?  I am sure I have asked you before for more information on this
interest group, but have gotten no response.  From what I see, the only
link to any information on it is to:

which is a restricted URL.

>    - No, we do *not* intend to replace a new generation of HTTP without
>      a large scale standadization process within IETF.

I am a bit worried about timeframes here if you go through a closed
development process, reach agreement there, then open it up at which point 

I see a real need for progression beyond what can be offered by HTTP/1.x.
The lack of any apparent active work on that is sufficient to cause some
people to consider trying to form their own group.

> but on the other hand
>    - Yes, we *do* want to remain focused on the task with small groups
>    - Yes, we *do* want serious commitment from people directly participating
>      in the design group as the web characterization group (hence the
>      50% here).
>    - Yes, we *do* need a trusted environment to discuss ideas and solutions


> I have suggested that the interest group would be a great place to start by
> signing up a few people from the Apache group if just someone would
> actually step up to the plate.

Easier said than done.

> The HTTP-NG Project *is* explained in quite a lot of details from the page

I am almost positive that this page didn't exist with this level of
information a couple of months ago but yes, it does provide a reasonable
amount of useful information.  

Received on Thursday, 12 March 1998 15:45:23 UTC