Who was working on this? Formalizing CGI, and perhaps advancing it,
would seem to be an important thing.
Brian
--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 95 09:33:02 PST
From: Mike Meyer <mwm@contessa.phone.net>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Subject: CGI???
I've seen a number of requests for a more formal specification for CGI
than <URL:http://hoohoo.ncsa.uiuc.edu/cgi/>.
This leads to the following questions:
1) Is CGI appropriate for an RFC? If not, what standards group would
it belong to?
2) If it's appropriate for an RFC, is this this WG it would belong to?
If not, which does it belong to?
3) Is anyone working on such a thing now?
Thanx,
<mike
would seem to be an important thing.
Brian
--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 95 09:33:02 PST
From: Mike Meyer <mwm@contessa.phone.net>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Subject: CGI???
I've seen a number of requests for a more formal specification for CGI
than <URL:http://hoohoo.ncsa.uiuc.edu/cgi/>.
This leads to the following questions:
1) Is CGI appropriate for an RFC? If not, what standards group would
it belong to?
2) If it's appropriate for an RFC, is this this WG it would belong to?
If not, which does it belong to?
3) Is anyone working on such a thing now?
Thanx,
<mike