Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Thomas Roessler wrote:
On 2008-01-31 17:43:12 -0800, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Must be deployable to IIS and Apache without requiring actions by the server
administrator in a configuration where the user can upload static files, run
serverside scripts (such as PHP, ASP, and CGI), control http headers, and
control authorization, but only do this for URIs under a given set of
subdirectories on the server.
I would like this to not mention specific products of any particular
vendor.
We can change "to IIS and Apache" to "with Web server software used by 20%
or more of the Web", but I think that would actually just make the
requirement less clear (though no more ambiguous).
Incidentally, I really would encourage people to not wordsmith these
requirements. Unless one actually disagrees with the requirement, I think
arguing about them is a waste of time, especially for Anne, who could
instead spend time doing real work on the normative parts of the spec. It
really makes no difference whether the text says "IIS" or not, at the end
of the day.
Agreed! Some of these requirements were initially unclear what they
meant and it was good that we fixed that. But beyond that I don't think
the exact wording matters at all.
/ Jonas
