Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 14005 invoked by uid 6000); 10 Feb 1998 08:46:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 13999 invoked from network); 10 Feb 1998 08:46:32 -0000 Received: from eastwood.aldigital.algroup.co.uk (194.128.162.193) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 10 Feb 1998 08:46:32 -0000 Received: from freeby.ben.algroup.co.uk (freeby.ben.algroup.co.uk [193.133.15.6]) by eastwood.aldigital.algroup.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA13221 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 1998 08:45:45 GMT Received: from algroup.co.uk (naughty.ben.algroup.co.uk [193.133.15.107]) by freeby.ben.algroup.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA22390 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 1998 08:45:23 GMT Message-ID: <34E01399.E9CCB723@algroup.co.uk> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 08:45:13 +0000 From: Ben Laurie Organization: A.L. Digital Ltd. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: HTTP-NG References: <9802091604.aa19225@paris.ics.uci.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > >Right. And you'll have done it without _any_ consultation with the > >developers of the most widely used HTTP server. Good plan! (not). > > That's not entirely accurate -- Henrik invited me back in November, > but that was after the PDG had already decided its goals, and I have > been too busy in any case. I am following it mostly because I am > supposed to be writing a research survey of various paradigms for > software interconnection (distributed object middleware and HTTP > being two examples). That's not the point. Consulting you is not consulting the Apache Group, as we all know. OK, that might be justification for changing "without any" to "with hardly any", especially considering that you have been too busy. > I welcome Daniel's input, particularly since he has already hacked > together an Apache/ILU two-headed server based on 1.2.4 (I think). > If nothing else, it would be nice to have someone in that group > keep an eye on the architectural enhancements we'll be making > to support 2.0. I, too, welcome Daniel's input. All I'm saying is that W3C clearly doesn't welcome AG's input and that that is foolish. 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. Cheers, Ben. -- Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686|Apache Group member Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |Apache-SSL author A.L. Digital Ltd, |http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache