Hi Julian,
At 14:06 27-10-2013, Julian Reschke wrote:
I have no preference here and will await what the IESG will say :-)
Ok. :-)
Our charter has prohibited us from adding new things to the
protocol. There are many things (methods, status codes, header
fields) that we *could* add, but in the end, that's why we have registries.
I am okay with the above comment about the protocol. I commented
about the registries in another message. Some of the registries
might have to be updated. In my opinion the charter would not
prohibit registration updates.
I believe that keeping new things in separate specs encourages
people to use the registries instead of relying on a specific set of
documents to provide the complete picture (today this already is a
problem - people believing that things not described on 2616 are not
"pure" HTTP).
I suggest using the same STD for the set of documents. It might
lessen the above problem over time.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy