Re: Last Call: <draft-nottingham-safe-hint-05.txt> (The "safe" HTTP Preference) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 28/10/2014 06:57, John Levine wrote:
>> As it is the meaning of a safe hint is to be intuited by the recipient.
> 
> Yes.  That's not a bug.
> 
> I don't understand the point of hypothetical arguments about whether a
> safe flag might be useful.  We already know the answer: Many of the
> largest web services in the world already have one.  Youtube puts
> theirs right on the home page.

John, I don't think the argument is about whether it will work technically
or whether it will be used. The argument is about whether this is something
that the IETF should endorse as a Proposed Standard, which implies that
we think it will be effective.

I would have no objection to this being published as an Informational RFC,
to document existing practice. But to be completely clear, I was *not* being
sarcastic when I compared it to RFC 3514, because its intended semantics can
be ignored by any web site operator that chooses to do so.

   Brian

> 
> All this does is to provide a consistent interface to the existing
> feature, and some operational flexibility to environments like schools
> and corporate networks where the person sitting at the browser isn't
> the one who sets the content policy.
> 
> R's,
> John
> 
> 





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]