Re: #428 Accept-Language ordering for identical qvalues

[James M Snell <[e-mail]>]

Well, considering that the http/2 discussion has already touched on
the introduction of stateful compression, a potential switch to
binary-header values, elimination of various elements such as response
status-text and the host header, and so on, a discussion of
eliminating conneg wouldn't be too extreme :-) ... The one thing to
consider is that it ought to be at least possible to deprecate conneg
without removing it entirely. We'll need to keep the mechanism around
for http/1 interop and passthrough but we can say instruct developers
that conneg ought to be avoided and we can discuss and highlight the
appropriate alternatives.

- James

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Eric J. Bowman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> "Roy T. Fielding" wrote:
>>
>> Regarding proactive negotiation in HTTP/2, I'll note that Waka
>> strips all negotiation fields.  I find the entire feature revolting,
>> from every architectural perspective, and would take the opportunity
>> of 2.x to remove it entirely.
>>
>
> That's a bold statement!  I'm surprised at the source --  I was under
> the impression that the late binding of representation to resource was
> a key feature of REST, and would therefore also be part of Waka?  This
> isn't the place for such a discussion, but I was hoping you'd enlighten
> us as to your thinking, either on your blog or here:
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/rest-discuss/message/19269
>
> What is on-topic here, is whether eliminating conneg in HTTP 2 amounts
> to a fundamental change to Web architecture, which exceeds the WG
> charter?
>
> -Eric
>