Re: [httpapi] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on charter-ietf-httpapi-00-00: (with COMMENT)

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

The -00-01 version of the proposed charter includes Mark's latest
edits.  Roman, will you check it and let us know what you think?

On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 2:51 PM Roman Danyliw via Datatracker
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-httpapi-00-00: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-httpapi/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ** (Like Martin and Alissa) I’m having trouble discriminating what work comes
> to HTTPbis as opposed to this proposed WG.  As written, does all HTTP for web
> browser go to HTTPbis; and machine-to-machine comes here?
>
> ** Per “Proposals for new HTTP status codes, methods, or other generic
> extensions, to be considered by the HTTP Working Group”, why would this WG
> propose new work for HTTPbis, instead of doing it?
>
> ** How do when know when this WG is done?
>
> ** Can the initial milestones please be added
>
>
>