* Paul Hoffman wrote: >Good god, no. HTTP/2 is quite complex, and it is likely that at least >some parts will turn out to be non-optimal. Please give the HTTPBIS WG >at least a year to shake out the protocol after wide deployment and >constant use. Rushing the WG just so we can feel good about slapping a >near-meaningless feel-good label on the spec is not a good process. > >Counter-proposal: we let the people closest to the protocol, the WG >that created it, decide when to ask for STD status. Indeed. And I note that some participants preferred Experimental status for the document for the time being. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@xxxxxxxxxxxx · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015) · http://www.websitedev.de/