--On Thursday, December 9, 2004 11:26 AM -0500 Geoffrey Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
well, I guess it depends on whether the goal is to help (for some definition
of help) support official HTTP variants (if indeed that's what 3229 is), or
just for things we actually take the time to implement fully.
I think it only makes sense for us to have the status lines for the things we actually implement. I'm not going to veto it, but just that I think it's foolish for us to add status lines for the goofy 'variants' of HTTP that we'll never support. IETF's stamp of approval means little as they've produced their fair share of crappy RFCs trying to hop on the HTTP bandwagon.
I will veto it. -1. I consider 3229 to be harmful to HTTP and do not wish to
support it in the current form. Folks can still implement it with extensions
if needed.
....Roy
