Re: associating constant feature sets wi
Johan Hjelm <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.medfree |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
At 10:14 1999-01-20 -0500, Reynolds Franklin NRC/Boston wrote:
>
>I agree with Koen, that a generic or transport independent negotiation
>protocol may have only limited value. On the other hand, I would like to
>see a capability negotiation protocol for HTTP. I am not sure whether the
>work should be done in this group or the HTTP group.
>
In a work that is being done in conjunction with the WAP Forum, myself and
Hidetaka Ohto of Panasonic are currently developing exactly that. We should
be able to make the protocol available for review here when the spec is in
a decent state.
It turns out that HTTP is a rather good fit for this (if you use extension
headers), but departs a lot from the protocol-independent direction the
conneg group has been taking, since several of our ideas are using generic
HTTP 1.1 functions to accomplish the process.
Johan
************************************************************
Johan HJELM
Ericsson RCUR T/K & Cyberlab NY
Currently visiting engineer at the W3C
The World Wide Web Consortium
[email protected]
http://www.w3.org/People/W3Cpeople.html#Hjelm
Fax +1-617-258 5999, Phone +1-617-263-9630
MIT/LCS, 545 Tech. Sq. Cambridge MA 02139 USA
opinions are personal, always my own,
and not necessarily those of Ericsson or the W3C.
============================================================