Howard Melman wrote:
>
> Well it's the reason the API is split into the generic
> serlvet class and the http specific ones. See page v of the
> preface of version 2.1a.
I suggest that you search the archives of this mailing list about this
topic. I'd rather not be much obfuscated by this API split.
> My point is that even if the underlying protocol treats
> things one way, there is no requirement that the API treat
> it the same. There is no normative statement in the API
> spec (that I found) which makes any kind of required
> connection.
I'm sorry that I probably did not make my statement clearly. I agree
that this should be addressed by the servlet API specs (that's why I
contacted Sun), but I looked at these RFC sources to see if something
interesting was there, as they provide the context here.
> I'd really like the spec (and other of sun's java specs) to
> adopt the terminology of RFC 2119 or it's equivalent.
This has been already suggested, I don't recall if accepted or not.
Carlos
___________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff SERVLET-INTEREST".
Archives: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/servlet-interest.html
Resources: http://java.sun.com/products/servlet/external-resources.html
LISTSERV Help: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/user/user.html
