this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
1138 points (98.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43916 readers
1052 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Let's get the AMAs kicked off on Lemmy, shall we.

Almost ten years ago now, I wrote RFC 7168, "Hypertext Coffeepot Control Protocol for Tea Efflux Appliances" which extends HTCPCP to handle tea brewing. Both Coffeepot Control Protocol and the tea-brewing extension are joke Internet Standards, and were released on Apr 1st (1998 and 2014). You may be familiar with HTTP error 418, "I'm a teapot"; this comes from the 1998 standard.

I'm giving a talk on the history of HTTP and HTCPCP at the WeAreDevelopers World Congress in Berlin later this month, and I need an FAQ section; AMA about the Internet and HTTP. Let's try this out!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

What would be a current version of this April Fool - what technology would you create a standard for, what beverage would you interface it to?

[โ€“] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The motivation for HTCPCP-TEA was that HTCPCP didn't cover tea brewing. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any infused hot drinks that aren't coffee or a tea of some kind...

Perhaps we need a homebrew beer request standard. The response lag would be tremendous though.

[โ€“] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[โ€“] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As it turns out, the standard almost caters for this directly:

Instead, an Alternates header as defined in RFC 2295 MUST be sent, with the available tea bags and/or leaf varieties as entries.

If cocoa and other loose powders count as a variety of tea leaf...

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, you're a true programmer. That'll become one of those decisions ossified into place 30 years from now that we need to work around, but it works because it's good enough.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)