Format of ProtocolVersion in HTTP/1.0

Simon E Spero <ses%tipper@tipper.oit.unc.edu>

Mail folder: WWW Talk Apr 94-present
Next message: Simon E Spero: "Error messages for HTTP/1.0 status codes?"
Previous message: Nathan Torkington: "Re: hyperRTF?"

Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 04:22:38 +0200
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Message-id: <9407010107.AA01384@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: ses%tipper@tipper.oit.unc.edu
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: Simon E Spero <ses%tipper@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Format of ProtocolVersion in HTTP/1.0
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Mime-Version: 1.0

[Note to Tim : the postscript version of the http spec in the internet-drafts
 archive is out of date (it's passed its expiry date, and several things are
 wrong. Can you ask somebody to remove it, and post a pointer to a more 
 up to date postscript version?]

As it now stands, ProtocolVersion is defined simply as HTTP/1.0, and nothing
is there to say that in the future other versions will be in the format 
HTTP/%f. Is this what is in fact intended, and if so, much the version 
be treated as an atomic string?

If a version string is unrecognised, is a server permitted to attempt to 
treat the request as if it were HTTP/1.0, or must it ignore any request
headers and treat the request as an HTTP 0.9 query?

Simon

p.s.
	I'll be posting responding to the various messages on FHTTP
	later on tonight.