5 ms·

Note that the "contributor" (Mark Nottingham) is also the author of the document in OP, and deserves a lot of credit for taking this approach. Given that his ar

Note that the "contributor" (Mark Nottingham) is also the author of the document in OP, and deserves a lot of credit for taking this approach. Given that his area of work is HTTP standards, I think he initially started removing 418 to tidy up and make things compliant and isn't just some bore who hates fun. Now he's managed to make everyone happy in a standards-compliant way.

awirth 9y ago
For those that may not know, Mark is also co-chair of the HTTP Working Group on the IETF[1]. [1]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/charter/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/charter/
peterwwillis 9y ago
It's weird though. The origin spec is specifically a discrete protocol called HTCPCP, not HTTP, so it has nothing to do with HTTP standards. They can do whatever they want with 418 in HTTP.
- geofft 9y ago
  They can, but they believe in rough consensus and working code and in being conservative in what they do and liberal in what they accept from others. It's clear that a lot of real-world HTTP implementations are using HTTP 418 to mean I'm A Teapot, whether or not they should, and that reassigning it would cause practical difficulties.
  - peterwwillis 9y ago
    That's not clear to me. Nobody relies on the feature, it's a tiny piece of code, only some vendors support it, and it's not even part of the spec. (It also can't be reassigned because it was never assigned to begin with) If they like 418, they can add it to the spec. But this idea that it's been "consumed" is weird. It's like saying <blink> was "consumed" in HTML because two browsers used to support it. It was just an unofficial feature of popular vendor software, and is now officially disavowed. Basically what we're saying is we're not going to implement 418 in the spec, but at the same time, we're not going to let anyone use it?
    - JoshTriplett 9y ago
      > It's like saying <blink> was "consumed" in HTML because two browsers used to support it. Which is accurate. Reintroducing a tag named "blink" into HTML to mean something other than "blinking text" would be a really bad idea for compatibility reasons.
      - peterwwillis 9y ago
        So we're trying to avoid breaking the internet by committing to people expecting an error when they're talking to a teapot? So that past implementations of clients connecting to teapots won't break? Like I say, we could also just add it to the spec... But that would be ridiculous, because why would you support telling someone you were a teapot in an HTTP protocol, when the feature is only useful in a protocol for brewing coffee? That would be like taking a programming language's syntax for assigning data objects and turning it into it's own standard for a text file format. Maybe a time traveler set this whole thing up 19 years ago just to troll people on standards boards.
        phab 9y ago
        > That would be like taking a programming language's syntax for assigning data objects and turning it into it's own standard for a text file format. Looking at you, JSON...
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        vacri 9y ago
        It's a miniscule bit of humour that consumes 1 of 31 used slots in a 100-slot block, in an area of tech that isn't even remotely drowning in 'fun stuff'. What does it really matter? There are plenty of perfectly serious RFCs that are even less implemented than 418. It's not like this RFC ratifying a 20-year-old joke that 'made it' is going to generate a cavalcade of lookalikes.
toomanybeersies 9y ago
It was interesting reading the threads on /r/webdev about this whole debacle. The threads were full of people saying that he's an arsehole with too much time on his hands who must hate fun. Nobody actually stopped to read the guys bio and realise that he's more than qualified to be bringing up these issues. It doesn't help that the guy who made save418.com is literally 14 (which seems to be about the average age of /r/webdev).
- mystrman111 9y ago
  The /r/webdev thread (https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/6stdcj/http_error_code_418_im_a_teapot_is_about_to_be/ https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/6stdcj/http_error_c...) remained quite respectful actually, afaik there were no real hostile remarks directed towards Mark Nottingham within it. In fact, it's ironic - the very comment I'm replying to is probably more distasteful and antagonistic than anything that could be found in the Reddit thread.
  - LukeShu 9y ago
    Often reddit threads read more respectful after-the-fact; the less respectful comments either get downvoted enough that they aren't displayed unless you look for them, or are moderated away. Often they are much harsher early in the thread. I'm not sure if that ways the case here, but it is common enough that I wouldn't doubt it.
    - mystrman111 9y ago
      When comments are removed by mods on Reddit, they're replaced with the text "[REMOVED]", which doesn't appear once in the referenced thread (insults would not be removed in the first place though, they break no /r/webdev rules). And you can scroll to the bottom of the thread to see all the downvoted comments, none of which are are condescending towards Mark. So no, that isn't the case here.
      - pwdisswordfish 9y ago

awirth 9y ago

For those that may not know, Mark is also co-chair of the HTTP Working Group on the IETF[1]. [1]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/charter/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/charter/

peterwwillis 9y ago

It's weird though. The origin spec is specifically a discrete protocol called HTCPCP, not HTTP, so it has nothing to do with HTTP standards. They can do whatever they want with 418 in HTTP.

geofft 9y ago
They can, but they believe in rough consensus and working code and in being conservative in what they do and liberal in what they accept from others. It's clear that a lot of real-world HTTP implementations are using HTTP 418 to mean I'm A Teapot, whether or not they should, and that reassigning it would cause practical difficulties.
- peterwwillis 9y ago
  That's not clear to me. Nobody relies on the feature, it's a tiny piece of code, only some vendors support it, and it's not even part of the spec. (It also can't be reassigned because it was never assigned to begin with) If they like 418, they can add it to the spec. But this idea that it's been "consumed" is weird. It's like saying <blink> was "consumed" in HTML because two browsers used to support it. It was just an unofficial feature of popular vendor software, and is now officially disavowed. Basically what we're saying is we're not going to implement 418 in the spec, but at the same time, we're not going to let anyone use it?
  - JoshTriplett 9y ago
    > It's like saying <blink> was "consumed" in HTML because two browsers used to support it. Which is accurate. Reintroducing a tag named "blink" into HTML to mean something other than "blinking text" would be a really bad idea for compatibility reasons.
    - peterwwillis 9y ago
      So we're trying to avoid breaking the internet by committing to people expecting an error when they're talking to a teapot? So that past implementations of clients connecting to teapots won't break? Like I say, we could also just add it to the spec... But that would be ridiculous, because why would you support telling someone you were a teapot in an HTTP protocol, when the feature is only useful in a protocol for brewing coffee? That would be like taking a programming language's syntax for assigning data objects and turning it into it's own standard for a text file format. Maybe a time traveler set this whole thing up 19 years ago just to troll people on standards boards.
      - phab 9y ago
        > That would be like taking a programming language's syntax for assigning data objects and turning it into it's own standard for a text file format. Looking at you, JSON...
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - vacri 9y ago
        It's a miniscule bit of humour that consumes 1 of 31 used slots in a 100-slot block, in an area of tech that isn't even remotely drowning in 'fun stuff'. What does it really matter? There are plenty of perfectly serious RFCs that are even less implemented than 418. It's not like this RFC ratifying a 20-year-old joke that 'made it' is going to generate a cavalcade of lookalikes.

toomanybeersies 9y ago

It was interesting reading the threads on /r/webdev about this whole debacle. The threads were full of people saying that he's an arsehole with too much time on his hands who must hate fun. Nobody actually stopped to read the guys bio and realise that he's more than qualified to be bringing up these issues. It doesn't help that the guy who made save418.com is literally 14 (which seems to be about the average age of /r/webdev).

mystrman111 9y ago
The /r/webdev thread (https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/6stdcj/http_error_code_418_im_a_teapot_is_about_to_be/ https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/6stdcj/http_error_c...) remained quite respectful actually, afaik there were no real hostile remarks directed towards Mark Nottingham within it. In fact, it's ironic - the very comment I'm replying to is probably more distasteful and antagonistic than anything that could be found in the Reddit thread.
- LukeShu 9y ago
  Often reddit threads read more respectful after-the-fact; the less respectful comments either get downvoted enough that they aren't displayed unless you look for them, or are moderated away. Often they are much harsher early in the thread. I'm not sure if that ways the case here, but it is common enough that I wouldn't doubt it.
  - mystrman111 9y ago
    When comments are removed by mods on Reddit, they're replaced with the text "[REMOVED]", which doesn't appear once in the referenced thread (insults would not be removed in the first place though, they break no /r/webdev rules). And you can scroll to the bottom of the thread to see all the downvoted comments, none of which are are condescending towards Mark. So no, that isn't the case here.
    - pwdisswordfish 9y ago