Peter Davis wrote:
I think this thread has (at least for me) is teasing out a new requirement .
It underscores the need to ensure support for non-HTML aware HTTP clients.
While many of the DAV clients Lisa enumerated use shared HTTP engines, they
may not always avail themselves of shared HTML engines.
As a result, perhaps a new requirement may look like:
- the protocol shall support the transfer/transport of security tokens over
HTTP, but does not require implementations to support the HTML form controls
<form> and the associated encodings (eg: Calendar Clients, FS-browsers,
etc...)
+1
Maybe that requirement (or a close cousin) is already there. I cannot seem
to drudge up the present requirements thread...
In an earlier thread Dick had ruled out of scope what he refers to as
"Rich Client" applications. At the BOF they were on the in/out list. I
believe that they need to be firmly on the "in" list.
Rob
_______________________________________________
dix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dix
