Re: p2: deprecating 205 Reset Content?

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 29 April 2013 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA9221F9E75 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 07:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ReMIKepPgPRA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 07:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF1221F9E6B for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 07:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UWpNj-0002Z5-L5 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:48:43 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:48:43 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UWpNj-0002Z5-L5@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1UWpNe-0002YA-W1 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:48:39 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1UWpNZ-0002wE-Md for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:48:38 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.10]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx002) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MN7F0-1UQEjn0OJU-006c8P for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:48:07 +0200
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2013 14:48:06 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.105]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp010) with SMTP; 29 Apr 2013 16:48:06 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18E0Po7vVIErEy/SRPJbUazndd2mFLKzfDHJJuzQy j3We5W+Y4boLZ2
Message-ID: <517E8825.9020707@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:48:05 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <D27B99AF-5FC0-4ABA-8E4D-9F3E241C4046@mnot.net> <CABP7RbcQBsHNEBDN9X4_QjpBSCOHumUgJsfAkeiP1a=xWZecWQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABP7RbcQBsHNEBDN9X4_QjpBSCOHumUgJsfAkeiP1a=xWZecWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.17.22; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.500, BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UWpNZ-0002wE-Md a1ccc5a37f1ec0f58a1d3b16c1fe37d2
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: p2: deprecating 205 Reset Content?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/517E8825.9020707@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17660
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On 2013-04-29 16:33, James M Snell wrote:
> The last time I used 205 was in a document management app I wrote in
> 1999. I think deprecating it is safe.

+-0

In general, I'd like to focus on things that are *essential* to get 
HTTPbis out of the door. This seems to be a change that's not essential.

And no: we don't need to submit *perfect* documents. They just need to 
be better than RFC 2616, and optimally without known issues. I totally 
expect to work on httpbisbis once http2 is out of the door, 
incorporating the feedback that will surely come out of that.

Best regards, Julian