httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>
Subject Re: HTTP-NG
Date Wed, 11 Feb 1998 03:51:43 GMT
On Tue, 10 Feb 1998, Ian Kluft wrote:

> > From: Marc Slemko <marcs@worldgate.com>
> > On Tue, 10 Feb 1998, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > > Not to mention calling into question the validity of W3C's claim that it
> > > "...is vendor neutral, working with the global community...". Clearly it
> > > is not.
> > 
> > <ha mode=cynical>
> > All we have to do is join the W3C for $5k/year with a $15k upfront
> > commitment.  Just becase we are too cheap...
> > </ha>
> 
> All you have to do is make new protocol options in Apache and the freeware
> Netscape, and send the URL for the specs to everyone... and W3C becomes
> irrelevant.  It would be to their benefit to work with Apache.

Sure, you _can_ do lots of things.

I don't support going off on our own, and I doubt many people here would
either.  Standards are good.  Vendors trying to force a standard by means
of market share is bad and often doesn't work well.  I fully support
standards.  Right now, that means the W3C.  I understand the desire to
keep the size of groups down.  We face the same problems, only difference
is we don't have a choice of saying these people must spend this much time
on it.

But I have to tell you, that if HTTP-NG gets bogged down defining a new
standard in object mumbo jumbo (not implying it isn't important) then a
whole lot of people, including me, may end up with no choice but to try
to do something that makes my network happy.  HTTP right now doesn't.


Mime
View raw message