On Tuesday 22 January 2002 03:16 pm, Tim Bray wrote:
> 1. It's here and deployed and debugged and well-understood
Is that HTTP 0.9,1.0 or 1.1 that you're talking about? I think very
few people really understand HTTP 1.1 entirely.
> The take-away is that no sensible person would assert that
> HTTP should be used for 99% of everything. But a sensible
> person has to raise the question: if HTTP can be made to work,
> what's the cost/benefit ratio of using something else?
Yep... but that shouldn't be used as an excuse to *not* look at
alternatives. After all, ftp had most of what HTTP had in 0.9... as
did gopher. Proof that things *can* change.
What happened to HTTP-NG I wonder?
