From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 09:33:18 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:33:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041633.JAA28685@gra.isi.edu> The RFC Editor needs to make an editorial decision on capitalization of "arpanet". This is such an important historical name that we felt a need to think a bit about it. Here is my memory: we originally called it "ARPANET", but over the years there has been a tendency to morph the name to "ARPAnet". The same thing happened to "NSFNET", which morphed into "NSFnet". Any opinions? Preferences? Hey, it's more interesting to me than the administrative hassles on ietf.org! ;-) Bob Braden From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 10:09:19 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 10:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041709.KAA28776@gra.isi.edu> I have had several private responses. Please share your wisdom! Bob From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 11:03:58 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041803.LAA28990@gra.isi.edu> My original query failed to add: IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the Internet; initial capital only" Smoke that, folks! Bob From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Oct 4 12:24:24 2006 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 15:24:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <20061004192424.DC64A872EF@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > The RFC Editor needs to make an editorial decision on capitalization of > "arpanet". This is such an important historical name that we felt a > need to think a bit about it. :-) > Here is my memory: we originally called it "ARPANET" You're right on target there. All the original documentation (1822, etc) which I hurriedly consulted (i.e. the ones on shelves which are convenient to the computer :-) uses "ARPANET". (FWIW, the very earliest document, the original RFP, used "ARPA Computer Network", and the BBN response to the RFP used "ARPA network".) > but over the years there has been a tendency to morph the name to > "ARPAnet". > Any opinions? Preferences? I always preferred (and used) the CamelCase variant; i.e. "ARPANet", with the ARPA in all upper-case because it's an acronym that was always given as all caps. Somehow "ARPAnet" bugged me, with the "net" all in lowercase; and ARPANET (although historically correct) didn't suit me either. I can't offer any rational argument as to why the other two are less tasteful (to me), but then that's the nature of taste! :-) > IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the > Internet; initial capital only" Uggh. *Totally* bletchiferous. Worse than all three of the other options, any of which I would *much* prefer to this. And how do we straighten out the IEEE? Would pointing out that all the original documents use "ARPANET" do the trick? Noel From vint at google.com Wed Oct 4 12:34:50 2006 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:34:50 -0700 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> I generally prefer ARPANET, but I also prefer Internet to internet when referring to the public network. It would be nice to have a definitive statement about the spelling of ARPANET. -----Original Message----- From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org To: internet-history at postel.org; rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org CC: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu; rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Sent: Wed Oct 04 12:24:24 2006 Subject: Re: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? > The RFC Editor needs to make an editorial decision on capitalization of > "arpanet". This is such an important historical name that we felt a > need to think a bit about it. :-) > Here is my memory: we originally called it "ARPANET" You're right on target there. All the original documentation (1822, etc) which I hurriedly consulted (i.e. the ones on shelves which are convenient to the computer :-) uses "ARPANET". (FWIW, the very earliest document, the original RFP, used "ARPA Computer Network", and the BBN response to the RFP used "ARPA network".) > but over the years there has been a tendency to morph the name to > "ARPAnet". > Any opinions? Preferences? I always preferred (and used) the CamelCase variant; i.e. "ARPANet", with the ARPA in all upper-case because it's an acronym that was always given as all caps. Somehow "ARPAnet" bugged me, with the "net" all in lowercase; and ARPANET (although historically correct) didn't suit me either. I can't offer any rational argument as to why the other two are less tasteful (to me), but then that's the nature of taste! :-) > IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the > Internet; initial capital only" Uggh. *Totally* bletchiferous. Worse than all three of the other options, any of which I would *much* prefer to this. And how do we straighten out the IEEE? Would pointing out that all the original documents use "ARPANET" do the trick? Noel From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 12:42:23 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041942.MAA29108@gra.isi.edu> Based upon the results so far, I think the RFC Editor will probably go with "ARPANET". We take Scott Brim as the expert on "NSFNet". Bob Braden From Robert at Zakon.org Wed Oct 4 12:49:24 2006 From: Robert at Zakon.org (Robert H'obbes' Zakon) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 15:49:24 -0400 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? In-Reply-To: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> Message-ID: <011301c6e7ee$327774c0$6400a8c0@griz> I would have to agree with Vint on this. Given the government's proclivity for acronyms, ARPANET fits cleanly, and is what was used in the "ARPANET Completion Report" (draft Sept 9, 1977). Similarly, I always refer to *the* 'I'nternet, and use lower case 'i'nternet only when discussing a generic network of networks. - Robert *** Robert H'obbes' Zakon www.Zakon.org > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org > [mailto:internet-history-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of Vint Cerf > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 3:35 PM > To: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu; internet-history at postel.org; > rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org > Cc: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org > Subject: Re: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? > > I generally prefer ARPANET, but I also prefer Internet to > internet when referring to the public network. It would be > nice to have a definitive statement about the spelling of ARPANET. > > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org > To: internet-history at postel.org; rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org > CC: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu; rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org > Sent: Wed Oct 04 12:24:24 2006 > Subject: Re: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? > > > The RFC Editor needs to make an editorial decision on > capitalization of > > "arpanet". This is such an important historical name > that we felt a > > need to think a bit about it. > > :-) > > > Here is my memory: we originally called it "ARPANET" > > You're right on target there. All the original documentation > (1822, etc) > which I hurriedly consulted (i.e. the ones on shelves which > are convenient to > the computer :-) uses "ARPANET". (FWIW, the very earliest > document, the > original RFP, used "ARPA Computer Network", and the BBN > response to the RFP > used "ARPA network".) > > > but over the years there has been a tendency to morph > the name to > > "ARPAnet". > > Any opinions? Preferences? > > I always preferred (and used) the CamelCase variant; i.e. > "ARPANet", with the > ARPA in all upper-case because it's an acronym that was > always given as all > caps. Somehow "ARPAnet" bugged me, with the "net" all in > lowercase; and > ARPANET (although historically correct) didn't suit me > either. I can't offer > any rational argument as to why the other two are less > tasteful (to me), but > then that's the nature of taste! :-) > > > IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the > networks on the > > Internet; initial capital only" > > Uggh. *Totally* bletchiferous. Worse than all three of the > other options, any > of which I would *much* prefer to this. > > And how do we straighten out the IEEE? Would pointing out that all the > original documents use "ARPANET" do the trick? > > Noel > > From alblue at earthlink.net Wed Oct 4 14:32:59 2006 From: alblue at earthlink.net (Allan Blue) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 17:32:59 -0400 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet References: Message-ID: <03ed01c6e7fc$b74cdb00$640a0a0a@AlBlue> I believe parents still have the right to name their baby. We called ours ARPANET. This was the preferred spelling from its inception in 1967 until I left IPTO ten years later. I think most would agree that it was, after all, a very capital idea. Al Blue ======= ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 3:00 PM Subject: internet-history Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1 > Today's Topics: > > 1. ARPANET vs ARPAnet? (Bob Braden) > 2. Re: ARPANET vs ARPAnet? (Bob Braden) > 3. Re: ARPANET vs ARPAnet? (Bob Braden) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:33:18 -0700 (PDT) > From: Bob Braden > Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? > To: internet-history at postel.org, rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org > Cc: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org > Message-ID: <200610041633.JAA28685 at gra.isi.edu> > > > The RFC Editor needs to make an editorial decision on capitalization of > "arpanet". This is such an important historical name that we felt a > need to think a bit about it. > > Here is my memory: we originally called it "ARPANET", but over the > years there has been a tendency to morph the name to "ARPAnet". The > same thing happened to "NSFNET", which morphed into "NSFnet". > > Any opinions? Preferences? > > Hey, it's more interesting to me than the administrative hassles on > ietf.org! ;-) > > Bob Braden > > > ------------------------------ From dhc2 at dcrocker.net Wed Oct 4 16:20:36 2006 From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:20:36 -0700 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? In-Reply-To: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> References: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> Message-ID: <452441C4.3020500@dcrocker.net> Vint Cerf wrote: > > IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the > > Internet; initial capital only" > > Uggh. *Totally* bletchiferous. Worse than all three of the other options, any > of which I would *much* prefer to this. > > And how do we straighten out the IEEE? Would pointing out that all the > original documents use "ARPANET" do the trick? OK. So there's not much question that "ARPANET" was the original form. The question is whether the string ought to be permitted to mature. Lower case was rare back then. In addition all upper case is geeky. Now, maybe geeky is fine, and certainly falling back on claims of historical accuracy make the all-upper choice valid. My own view is that terms should become a naturalized part of the languge and that means they should match normal case choices. So I happen to think that "Arpanet" is more refined... d/ ps. THis also means we should get the hyphen out of email. -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From the.map at alum.mit.edu Wed Oct 4 17:24:56 2006 From: the.map at alum.mit.edu (Mike Padlipsky) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 17:24:56 -0700 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? In-Reply-To: <452441C4.3020500@dcrocker.net> References: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> <452441C4.3020500@dcrocker.net> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20061004163918.01df9598@alum.mit.edu> At 04:20 PM 10/4/2006, Dave Crocker wrote: >ps. THis also means we should get the hyphen out of email. while i'd intended to stay out of this one, since my own original preference for the indisputably historically accurate rendering does seem to be the consensus position and my latterday fondness for the arguably more philologically accurate 'ARPANet' isn't strong enough to have prompted me to join in, that's too much for me to hold my peace over. 'e-mail' is bad enough, being not only historically inaccurate but also both overcutesy and encouraging the subliterati to babble about 'sending an e-mail' even tho even they aren't ignorant enough to say 'send me a mail'. but 'email' is even worse, given that as written it really ought to be pronounced 'em-ail', as in dorothy gale's uncle's wife isn't feeling well, to say nothing of its catering to the evil dummy-downers' conscious or unconscious tendency to save the newspapers some ink whenever they can regardless of the loss of precision it entails. if the truth be known [and if attempts to impose our own tastes are in play, as they appear to be], when it comes to 'we should's what i think we should call it is netmail, as we called it when we were inventing it -- however much too much to hope for that level of historical accuracy is. not that the world will particularly note whatever we say here, of course.... cheers, map [whose shoulder problems caused him to break down some time ago and create a 'signature' file to apologize for the lack of his formerly customary e-volubility -- and who's been employing shiftless typing for a long time now to spare his wristsnfingers, in case you didn't know ... and who's further broken down and done http://www.lafn.org/~ba213/mapstuff.html , rather grudgingly] From faber at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 18:40:33 2006 From: faber at ISI.EDU (Ted Faber) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 18:40:33 -0700 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? In-Reply-To: <452441C4.3020500@dcrocker.net> References: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> <452441C4.3020500@dcrocker.net> Message-ID: <20061005014033.GA2723@hut.isi.edu> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 04:20:36PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote: > ps. THis also means we should get the hyphen out of email. Get it out of "t-shirt" first. -- Ted Faber http://www.isi.edu/~faber PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.asc Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#SIG -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From vint at google.com Thu Oct 5 06:42:54 2006 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 09:42:54 -0400 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? In-Reply-To: <200610041803.LAA28990@gra.isi.edu> Message-ID: <02c101c6e884$2a789330$6d0aa8c0@corp.google.com> Well (expletive deleted) IEEE! Vinton G Cerf Chief Internet Evangelist Google Regus Suite 384 13800 Coppermine Road Herndon, VA 20171 +1 703 234-1823 +1 703-234-5822 (f) vint at google.com www.google.com -----Original Message----- From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org [mailto:internet-history-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of Bob Braden Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 2:04 PM To: internet-history at postel.org; rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org; braden at ISI.EDU Cc: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Subject: Re: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? My original query failed to add: IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the Internet; initial capital only" Smoke that, folks! Bob From stig.venaas at uninett.no Thu Oct 5 06:46:41 2006 From: stig.venaas at uninett.no (Stig Venaas) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:46:41 +0200 Subject: [ih] IP versions 1-3 Message-ID: <45250CC1.1090707@uninett.no> I tried to such through the archive, but I haven't found any discussion on what happened to IP versions 1-3. Do there exist protocols or proposals for IP protocols prior to what became v4, or what was the reason for naming it IPv4? Is e.g. NCP regarded as one of those pre v4 versions? Stig From craig at aland.bbn.com Thu Oct 5 07:04:03 2006 From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:04:03 -0400 Subject: [ih] IP versions 1-3 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:46:41 +0200." <45250CC1.1090707@uninett.no> Message-ID: <20061005140403.11E0468@aland.bbn.com> IEN-28 of February 1978 is "Draft Internet Protocol Specification" and preceeds IEN's 40 and 54, both of which are labelled IPv4 (interesting to figure out what, if anything changed between those two and RFC 791). So at least one earlier version was circulated. Alas, I can't find IEN-28 online. Craig In message <45250CC1.1090707 at uninett.no>, Stig Venaas writes: >I tried to such through the archive, but I haven't found any discussion >on what happened to IP versions 1-3. Do there exist protocols or >proposals for IP protocols prior to what became v4, or what was the >reason for naming it IPv4? Is e.g. NCP regarded as one of those pre v4 >versions? > >Stig From vint at google.com Thu Oct 5 07:08:30 2006 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 10:08:30 -0400 Subject: [ih] IP versions 1-3 In-Reply-To: <45250CC1.1090707@uninett.no> Message-ID: <02da01c6e887$bd21b650$6d0aa8c0@corp.google.com> NCP is totally separate Versions 1-2 of tcp were followed by versions 3 and 4 in which IP was split out There was no IP version 1-2 except that routers (gateways) knew about TCP headers in versions 1-2 of TCP and with version 3 they only knew about IP headers. V Vinton G Cerf Chief Internet Evangelist Google Regus Suite 384 13800 Coppermine Road Herndon, VA 20171 +1 703 234-1823 +1 703-234-5822 (f) vint at google.com www.google.com -----Original Message----- From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org [mailto:internet-history-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of Stig Venaas Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 9:47 AM To: internet-history at postel.org Subject: [ih] IP versions 1-3 I tried to such through the archive, but I haven't found any discussion on what happened to IP versions 1-3. Do there exist protocols or proposals for IP protocols prior to what became v4, or what was the reason for naming it IPv4? Is e.g. NCP regarded as one of those pre v4 versions? Stig From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Oct 5 07:45:19 2006 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 10:45:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ih] IP versions 1-3 Message-ID: <20061005144519.464E486AE5@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > I tried to such through the archive, but I haven't found any discussion > on what happened to IP versions 1-3. There has indeed been prior discussion of these issues. The archive lacks a search function (although I suppose one could use Google), but the following posts (and the ones around them) might prove informative: http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/2005-March/000470.html http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/2006-March/000542.html http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/2006-March/000547.html > Do there exist protocols or proposals for IP protocols prior to what > became v4, or what was the reason for naming it IPv4? There was no separate IP before TCP 3; in TCP 1 and TCP 2 the internet address, etc were part of the TCP header. Here's a clip from one of those messages, with some relevant data: ---- RFC-750 contains the following numbers for ... IP header version numbers: Decimal Octal Version References ------- ----- ------- ---------- 0 0 March 1977 version [35] 1 1 January 1978 version [36] 2 2 February 1978 version A [42] 3 3 February 1978 version B [43] 4 4 September 1978 version 4 [44] [35] Cerf, V. "Specification of Internet Transmission Control Program -- TCP (version 2)," March 1977. [36] Cerf, V. and J. Postel, "Specification of Internetwork Transmission Control Program -- TCP Version 3," USC-Information Sciences Institute, January 1978. [42] Postel, J. "Draft Internetwork Protocol Specification -- Version 2," USC-Information Sciences Institute, February 1978. [43] Cerf, V. "A Proposed New Internet Header Format," Advanced Research Projects Agency, IEN 26, 14 February 1978. [44] Postel, J. "Internetwork Protocol Specification -- Version 4," IEN-54, USC-Information Sciences Institute, September 1978. [45] Cerf, V. "A Proposal for TCP Version 3.1 Header Format," Advanced Research Projects Agency, IEN 26, 14 February 1978. Note that both ref 43 and 45 claim to be IEN 26! The second should probably be IEN 27. ref 42 might be IEN 28. ---- > Is e.g. NCP regarded as one of those pre v4 versions? NCP is completely different, it's entirely ARPANet-specific. A field in the ARPANet-specific header (the so-called 1822 header), the link number, differentiated between NCP traffic and TCP (and later, IP) traffic. Noel From PGross at PGross.net Thu Oct 5 12:18:41 2006 From: PGross at PGross.net (Phill Gross) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:18:41 -0400 Subject: [ih] WWW date? Message-ID: <004e01c6e8b3$11680ea0$eba8a8c0@quisitor> Here's a question I bet this group can answer in a flash: Various sources show either 1989 or 1991 as the date for the "birth of the web". Apparently Tim Berners-Lee supports the 1989 date. Does anyone have more of the story? Does the 1991 date have any significance (eg, some major release date) or is it simply wrong. Thanks, Phill Gross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Robert at Zakon.org Thu Oct 5 12:33:18 2006 From: Robert at Zakon.org (Robert H'obbes' Zakon) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:33:18 -0400 Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: <004e01c6e8b3$11680ea0$eba8a8c0@quisitor> Message-ID: <023f01c6e8b5$1d0af5e0$6400a8c0@griz> 1989 was the original proposal date. 1991 was when the software was released on the Net. The first Web server was launched in 1990. - Robert *** Robert H'obbes' Zakon Author, Hobbes' Internet Timeline www.Zakon.org _____ From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org [mailto:internet-history-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of Phill Gross Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 3:19 PM To: internet-history at postel.org Cc: 'Jeff'; 'Len Kleinrock' Subject: [ih] WWW date? Here's a question I bet this group can answer in a flash: Various sources show either 1989 or 1991 as the date for the "birth of the web". Apparently Tim Berners-Lee supports the 1989 date. Does anyone have more of the story? Does the 1991 date have any significance (eg, some major release date) or is it simply wrong. Thanks, Phill Gross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vint at google.com Thu Oct 5 12:32:48 2006 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:32:48 -0400 Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: <004e01c6e8b3$11680ea0$eba8a8c0@quisitor> Message-ID: <011701c6e8b5$0b654a70$f90013ac@corp.google.com> i will ask tim and someone should just look at Weaving the Web. I think 1991 is about the time that marc andreesen started working on Mosaic but it may also be a time when tim made a major release. Vinton G Cerf Chief Internet Evangelist Google Regus Suite 384 13800 Coppermine Road Herndon, VA 20171 +1 703 234-1823 +1 703-234-5822 (f) vint at google.com www.google.com _____ From: Phill Gross [mailto:PGross at PGross.net] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 3:19 PM To: internet-history at postel.org Cc: 'Jeff'; 'Vint Cerf'; 'Len Kleinrock' Subject: WWW date? Here's a question I bet this group can answer in a flash: Various sources show either 1989 or 1991 as the date for the "birth of the web". Apparently Tim Berners-Lee supports the 1989 date. Does anyone have more of the story? Does the 1991 date have any significance (eg, some major release date) or is it simply wrong. Thanks, Phill Gross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From braden at ISI.EDU Thu Oct 5 12:40:42 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 12:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ih] internet-history Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3 Message-ID: <200610051940.MAA29498@gra.isi.edu> And then there was IP version 2.5 ... ;-) Bob Braden From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Oct 5 12:48:56 2006 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ih] WWW date? Message-ID: <20061005194856.B736186AFA@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: "Phill Gross" > Various sources show either 1989 or 1991 as the date for the "birth of > the web". Apparently Tim Berners-Lee supports the 1989 date. Well, I expect it depends on what you mean by "birth of the web"! Do you mean "first mention of the idea", "first exerimental transfers inside CERN", "first actual service usage inside CERN", "first public release of web software by CERN", etc, etc! > Does anyone have more of the story? Does the 1991 date have any > significance (eg, some major release date) or is it simply wrong. According to: http://press.web.cern.ch/public/Content/Chapters/AboutCERN/Achievements/WorldWideWeb/WebHistory/WebHistory-en.html it was first proposed in 1989, and the first prototype software was running by the end of 1990. The first release of that code outside CERN came in 1991. It's hard to realize now, but the early growth of the web was quite slow. According to: http://www.mit.edu/people/mkgray/growth/ As of June, 1993 there were only 130 Web sites! The first release of MOSAIC was only in early 1993, as well. Noel From ajs at crankycanuck.ca Thu Oct 5 13:12:42 2006 From: ajs at crankycanuck.ca (Andrew Sullivan) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:12:42 -0400 Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: <004e01c6e8b3$11680ea0$eba8a8c0@quisitor> References: <004e01c6e8b3$11680ea0$eba8a8c0@quisitor> Message-ID: <20061005201242.GH8826@phlogiston.dyndns.org> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:18:41PM -0400, Phill Gross wrote: > > Various sources show either 1989 or 1991 as the date for the "birth of the > web". Apparently Tim Berners-Lee supports the 1989 date. > > Does anyone have more of the story? Does the 1991 date have any > significance (eg, some major release date) or is it simply wrong. According to the copy of _Weaving the Web_ I have here, 1989 was the year in which the Web proposal was circulating at CERN (see p 22); The WorldWideWeb browser/editor was communicating with info.cern.ch by 25 Dec 1990 (p 30); and WorldWideWeb was shared inside CERN by March 1991 (p 45). In May, Paul Kunz visited, saw the system, and liked it. He took it with him when he went back to SLAC in Palo Alto, where he introduced the Web to Louise Addis (p. 45). Dunno if that helps clarify. A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs at crankycanuck.ca A certain description of men are for getting out of debt, yet are against all taxes for raising money to pay it off. --Alexander Hamilton From Robert at Zakon.org Thu Oct 5 15:47:52 2006 From: Robert at Zakon.org (Robert H'obbes' Zakon) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 18:47:52 -0400 Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: <200610052018.k95KILd07164@kiwi.cs.ucla.edu> Message-ID: <028801c6e8d0$4b347b10$6400a8c0@griz> You've helped me a few times with the Timeline, glad to return the favor. By the way, for anyone interested in the Web's history, you can get snippets "from the horse's mouth" at www.w3.org/history/. Cheers, Robert > -----Original Message----- > From: Dr Leonard Kleinrock [mailto:lk at CS.UCLA.EDU] > Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:18 PM > To: Robert H'obbes' Zakon; PGross at pgross.net; > internet-history at postel.org > Cc: 'Jeff' > Subject: RE: [ih] WWW date? > > Dear Robert, > > That helps a great deal. > > Much thanks, > > Len Kleinrock From louie at transsys.com Thu Oct 5 17:01:31 2006 From: louie at transsys.com (Louis Mamakos) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:01:31 -0400 Subject: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? In-Reply-To: <02c101c6e884$2a789330$6d0aa8c0@corp.google.com> References: <02c101c6e884$2a789330$6d0aa8c0@corp.google.com> Message-ID: <45259CDB.4010700@transsys.com> You mean the Ieee. louie Vint Cerf wrote: > Well (expletive deleted) IEEE! > > > Vinton G Cerf > Chief Internet Evangelist > Google > Regus Suite 384 > 13800 Coppermine Road > Herndon, VA 20171 > > +1 703 234-1823 > +1 703-234-5822 (f) > > vint at google.com > www.google.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org > [mailto:internet-history-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of Bob Braden > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 2:04 PM > To: internet-history at postel.org; rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org; braden at ISI.EDU > Cc: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org > Subject: Re: [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? > > > My original query failed to add: > > IEEE style guide says > "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the Internet; initial capital only" > > Smoke that, folks! > > Bob > From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Thu Oct 5 17:45:42 2006 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (ian.peter at ianpeter.com) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 19:45:42 -0500 Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20061005194542.s82ntbti0yas80go@www.ianpeter.com> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:18:41 -0400 > From: "Phill Gross" > Subject: [ih] WWW date? > To: > Cc: 'Jeff' , 'Len Kleinrock' > Message-ID: <004e01c6e8b3$11680ea0$eba8a8c0 at quisitor> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Here's a question I bet this group can answer in a flash: > > > > Various sources show either 1989 or 1991 as the date for the "birth of the > web". Apparently Tim Berners-Lee supports the 1989 date. > > > > Does anyone have more of the story? Does the 1991 date have any > significance (eg, some major release date) or is it simply wrong. > > > > Thanks, > > Phill Gross > As in many things it depends on what you mean by "birth of the web" Was it Ted Nelson's Xanadu? (probably the earliest direct origins with the concept of hypertext) Was it the concept of a url? (necessary pre-requisite) Was it html (necessary pre-requisite) Was it availability of a browser (necessary pre-requisite again) So you can probably spin it a bit earlier than 1989, but certainly the Tim Berners Lee work brought this all together. Ive written a brief history a few years back at http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/web.html and there are a few other links of relevance on the site. I realise looking back at this I don't have a date for either url or html - did any of these relevant standards precede the W3C split from IETF? Ian Peter www.nethistory.info >> > From gray+history at washington.edu Thu Oct 5 19:13:51 2006 From: gray+history at washington.edu (Terry Gray) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 19:13:51 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: <20061005194542.s82ntbti0yas80go@www.ianpeter.com> References: <20061005194542.s82ntbti0yas80go@www.ianpeter.com> Message-ID: Ian, I was under the impression that the hypertext idea pre-dated Ted Nelson by some years; in particular, I've usually heard the concept attributed to Vannevar Bush in his 1945 article "As We May Think", in which he describes the "Memex" personal information machine... http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush No? -teg On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, ian.peter at ianpeter.com wrote: > As in many things it depends on what you mean by "birth of the web" > > Was it Ted Nelson's Xanadu? (probably the earliest direct origins with the > concept of hypertext) > > Was it the concept of a url? (necessary pre-requisite) > > Was it html (necessary pre-requisite) > > Was it availability of a browser (necessary pre-requisite again) > > So you can probably spin it a bit earlier than 1989, but certainly the > Tim Berners Lee work brought this all together. > > Ive written a brief history a few years back at > > http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/web.html > > and there are a few other links of relevance on the site. I realise > looking back at this I don't have a date for either url or html - did > any of these relevant standards precede the W3C split from IETF? > > Ian Peter > www.nethistory.info > > > > > > > > From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Thu Oct 5 19:57:59 2006 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (ian.peter at ianpeter.com) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:57:59 -0500 Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: References: <20061005194542.s82ntbti0yas80go@www.ianpeter.com> Message-ID: <20061005215759.sebwin11dkw00wkg@www.ianpeter.com> Quoting Terry Gray : > Ian, > I was under the impression that the hypertext idea pre-dated Ted > Nelson by some years; in particular, I've usually heard the concept > attributed to Vannevar Bush in his 1945 article "As We May Think", in > which he describes the "Memex" personal information machine... > > http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush > > No? > I think the word was Ted's but yes the concept is older - indeed taking a long bow, ancient hieroglyphic tablets cross referenced each other. U R right, Vannevar Bush deserves a mention in this context. Ian Peter www.nethistory.info > -teg > > On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, ian.peter at ianpeter.com wrote: > >> As in many things it depends on what you mean by "birth of the web" >> >> Was it Ted Nelson's Xanadu? (probably the earliest direct >> origins with the >> concept of hypertext) >> >> Was it the concept of a url? (necessary pre-requisite) >> >> Was it html (necessary pre-requisite) >> >> Was it availability of a browser (necessary pre-requisite again) >> >> So you can probably spin it a bit earlier than 1989, but certainly the >> Tim Berners Lee work brought this all together. >> >> Ive written a brief history a few years back at >> >> http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/web.html >> >> and there are a few other links of relevance on the site. I realise >> looking back at this I don't have a date for either url or html - did >> any of these relevant standards precede the W3C split from IETF? >> >> Ian Peter >> www.nethistory.info >> >> >> > > >> > >> > From vint at google.com Thu Oct 5 20:46:32 2006 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 23:46:32 -0400 Subject: [ih] WWW date? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001a01c6e8fa$051f1930$6d0aa8c0@corp.google.com> And of course, doug engelbart... Vinton G Cerf Chief Internet Evangelist Google Regus Suite 384 13800 Coppermine Road Herndon, VA 20171 +1 703 234-1823 +1 703-234-5822 (f) vint at google.com www.google.com -----Original Message----- From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org [mailto:internet-history-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of Terry Gray Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 10:14 PM To: ian.peter at ianpeter.com Cc: internet-history at postel.org Subject: Re: [ih] WWW date? Ian, I was under the impression that the hypertext idea pre-dated Ted Nelson by some years; in particular, I've usually heard the concept attributed to Vannevar Bush in his 1945 article "As We May Think", in which he describes the "Memex" personal information machine... http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush No? -teg On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, ian.peter at ianpeter.com wrote: > As in many things it depends on what you mean by "birth of the web" > > Was it Ted Nelson's Xanadu? (probably the earliest direct origins > with the concept of hypertext) > > Was it the concept of a url? (necessary pre-requisite) > > Was it html (necessary pre-requisite) > > Was it availability of a browser (necessary pre-requisite again) > > So you can probably spin it a bit earlier than 1989, but certainly the > Tim Berners Lee work brought this all together. > > Ive written a brief history a few years back at > > http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/web.html > > and there are a few other links of relevance on the site. I realise > looking back at this I don't have a date for either url or html - did > any of these relevant standards precede the W3C split from IETF? > > Ian Peter > www.nethistory.info > > > > > > > > From braden at ISI.EDU Fri Oct 6 10:23:58 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:23:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ih] Ieee Message-ID: <200610061723.KAA29763@gra.isi.edu> One wonders what the Ieee writes about the Ietf, the Iesg, and the Iab? Bob Braden From vint at google.com Fri Oct 6 13:42:34 2006 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 13:42:34 -0700 Subject: [ih] WWW date? Message-ID: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC888C@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> Engelbart 1958 also -----Original Message----- From: internet-history-bounces at postel.org To: ian.peter at ianpeter.com CC: internet-history at postel.org Sent: Thu Oct 05 19:13:51 2006 Subject: Re: [ih] WWW date? Ian, I was under the impression that the hypertext idea pre-dated Ted Nelson by some years; in particular, I've usually heard the concept attributed to Vannevar Bush in his 1945 article "As We May Think", in which he describes the "Memex" personal information machine... http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush No? -teg On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, ian.peter at ianpeter.com wrote: > As in many things it depends on what you mean by "birth of the web" > > Was it Ted Nelson's Xanadu? (probably the earliest direct origins with the > concept of hypertext) > > Was it the concept of a url? (necessary pre-requisite) > > Was it html (necessary pre-requisite) > > Was it availability of a browser (necessary pre-requisite again) > > So you can probably spin it a bit earlier than 1989, but certainly the > Tim Berners Lee work brought this all together. > > Ive written a brief history a few years back at > > http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/web.html > > and there are a few other links of relevance on the site. I realise > looking back at this I don't have a date for either url or html - did > any of these relevant standards precede the W3C split from IETF? > > Ian Peter > www.nethistory.info > > > > > > > > From PGross at PGross.net Fri Oct 6 15:06:24 2006 From: PGross at PGross.net (Phill Gross) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 18:06:24 -0400 Subject: [ih] WWW dates In-Reply-To: AAAAAEVWVJqXiKFAhoys69CkQq1EuykA Message-ID: <001b01c6e993$aa2ba850$eba8a8c0@quisitor> Thanks to Terry Gray, Vint Cerf, Andrew Sullivan, Robert H'obbes' Zakon, Noel Chiappa, Ian Peter, and others for the comments and references. It led me on an interesting exercise of "associative indexing" on a rainy afternoon. Does anyone have any other references or details to add? Phill Gross ----------- 1945 - Vannevar Bush describes the "Memex" and "associative indexing", concepts similar to Hypertext and the Web (perhaps even the personal computer). See Note 1 below. Late 1950's-late 60's - Inspired by Vannevar Bush's 1945 article, Douglas Engelbart founds the Augmentation Research Lab (ARC) at SRI. See Note 2 below. 1960 - Ted Nelson founds Project Xanadu. See Note 3 below. 1989 - Tim Berners-Lee initiates Web proposal within CERN ("Weaving the Web", p22) 1989-early 90's? - Tim Berners-Lee "graft(s) hypertext capability onto a homegrown SGML-like markup language" (Wikipedia). Later publishes RFC 1630, "Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW", June 1994, and RFC 1866, "Hypertext Markup Language - 2.0", Berners-Lee&Connolly, Nov 1995. See Note 4 below. 1989-90 - By Dec 89, a "browser/editor" is communicating with info.cern.ch (presumably, still in testing mode) 1991 - March 91, WWW is being shared within CERN; May 91, visitor Paul Kunz takes a copy of the system back to SLAC and introduces it to Louise Addis. 1993 - Release of NCSA Mosaic browser ------- Note 1 - Vannevar Bush, from "As We May Think", 1945 "The human mind...operates by association. With one item in its grasp, it snaps instantly to the next...in accordance with some intricate web of trails... . associative indexing...a provision whereby any item may be caused at will to select immediately and automatically another. This is the essential feature of the memex. The process of tying two items together is the important thing." (The Atlantic Monthly; July 1945; "As We May Think"; Volume 176, No. 1; 101-108, www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush) Note 2 - From various sources, including Wikipedia The Augmentation Research Lab (ARC) focuses on human-computer interfaces and pioneers work in bit-mapped screens, Windowed GUI's, linked documents, groupware, etc in the "Online System" (NLS). Engelbart writes "Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework" in 1962. He applies for patent on the computer mouse in 1967 (U.S. Patent 3,541,541). Gives notable "mother of all demos" in Dec 1968, which demonstrates the features of NLS. (various sources) Note 3 - Ted Nelson and Xanadu, From Wikipedia Theodor Holm Nelson...American sociologist, philosopher, and pioneer of information technology. ...coined the term "hypertext" in 1963 and published it in 1965. ... The main thrust of his work has been to make computers easily accessible to ordinary people. His motto is: "A user interface should be so simple that a beginner in an emergency can understand it within ten seconds." ...founded Project Xanadu in 1960 with the goal of creating a computer network with a simple user interface. ... The Xanadu project itself failed to flourish, for a variety of reasons which are disputed. Journalist Gary Wolf published an unflattering history, The Curse of Xanadu, on Nelson and his project in the June, 1995 issue of Wired magazine. ... Some aspects of its vision are in the process of being fulfilled by Tim Berners-Lee's invention of the World Wide Web. The Web owes much of its inspiration to Xanadu, but Nelson dislikes the World Wide Web, XML and all embedded markup, and regards Berners-Lee's work as a gross over-simplification of his own work: "HTML is precisely what we were trying to PREVENT- ever-breaking links, links going outward only, quotes you can't follow to their origins, no version management, no rights management." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Nelson) Note 4 - HTML >From RFC 1866 The HTML document type was designed by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN as part of the 1990 World Wide Web project. In 1992, Dan Connolly wrote the HTML Document Type Definition (DTD) and a brief HTML specification. >From Wikipedia: "HTML is defined in formal specifications that were developed and published throughout the 1990s, inspired by Tim Berners-Lee's prior proposals to graft hypertext capability onto a homegrown SGML-like markup language for the Internet. The first published specification for a language called HTML was drafted by Berners-Lee with Dan Connolly, and was published in 1993 by the IETF as a formal "application" of SGML (with an SGML Document Type Definition defining the grammar). The IETF created an HTML Working Group in 1994 and published HTML 2.0 in 1995, but further development under the auspices of the IETF was stalled by competing interests. Since 1996, the HTML specifications have been maintained, with input from commercial software vendors, by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). ..." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Html) From chris at cs.utexas.edu Fri Oct 6 16:09:24 2006 From: chris at cs.utexas.edu (Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 18:09:24 -0500 Subject: [ih] WWW dates In-Reply-To: <001b01c6e993$aa2ba850$eba8a8c0@quisitor> References: <001b01c6e993$aa2ba850$eba8a8c0@quisitor> Message-ID: <3881949ae5c49d6586439cc00f6083e1@cs.utexas.edu> Phill: I don't want to speak for Alan Kay, but you can listen for yourself (see below), about Kay's brief observations of the difference between Engelbart's concepts and Berners-Lee concepts. I have always wanted to go back to Engelbart's early work to see exactly what Alan meant. Alan, Vint, Kahn, Roberts and an interesting variety of next generation pioneers participated in Kleinrock's hosting of a full-day of sessions celebrating the 35th anniversary of the ARPA Computer Network hosts/IMPS first communicating between SRI and UCLA. Here's the link, and the videos are online: http://internetanniversary.cs.ucla.edu/index.html thanks, Chris On Oct 6, 2006, at 5:06 PM, Phill Gross wrote: > Thanks to Terry Gray, Vint Cerf, Andrew Sullivan, Robert H'obbes' > Zakon, > Noel Chiappa, Ian Peter, and others for the comments and references. > > It led me on an interesting exercise of "associative indexing" on a > rainy > afternoon. > > Does anyone have any other references or details to add? > > Phill Gross > ----------- > > 1945 - Vannevar Bush describes the "Memex" and "associative indexing", > concepts similar to Hypertext and the Web (perhaps even the personal > computer). See Note 1 below. > > Late 1950's-late 60's - Inspired by Vannevar Bush's 1945 article, > Douglas > Engelbart founds the Augmentation Research Lab (ARC) at SRI. See > Note 2 > below. > > 1960 - Ted Nelson founds Project Xanadu. See Note 3 below. > > 1989 - Tim Berners-Lee initiates Web proposal within CERN ("Weaving the > Web", p22) > > 1989-early 90's? - Tim Berners-Lee "graft(s) hypertext capability onto > a > homegrown SGML-like markup language" (Wikipedia). Later publishes RFC > 1630, > "Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW", June 1994, and RFC 1866, > "Hypertext > Markup Language - 2.0", Berners-Lee&Connolly, Nov 1995. See Note 4 > below. > > 1989-90 - By Dec 89, a "browser/editor" is communicating with > info.cern.ch > (presumably, still in testing mode) > > 1991 - March 91, WWW is being shared within CERN; May 91, visitor Paul > Kunz > takes a copy of the system back to SLAC and introduces it to Louise > Addis. > > 1993 - Release of NCSA Mosaic browser > > ------- > > Note 1 - Vannevar Bush, from "As We May Think", 1945 > > "The human mind...operates by association. With one item in its grasp, > it > snaps instantly to the next...in accordance with some intricate web of > trails... . associative indexing...a provision whereby any item may > be > caused at will to select immediately and automatically another. This > is the > essential feature of the memex. The process of tying two items > together is > the important thing." (The Atlantic Monthly; July 1945; "As We May > Think"; > Volume 176, No. 1; 101-108, www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush) > > Note 2 - From various sources, including Wikipedia > > The Augmentation Research Lab (ARC) focuses on human-computer > interfaces and > pioneers work in bit-mapped screens, Windowed GUI's, linked documents, > groupware, etc in the "Online System" (NLS). Engelbart writes > "Augmenting > Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework" in 1962. He applies for > patent on > the computer mouse in 1967 (U.S. Patent 3,541,541). Gives notable > "mother of > all demos" in Dec 1968, which demonstrates the features of NLS. > (various > sources) > > > Note 3 - Ted Nelson and Xanadu, From Wikipedia > > Theodor Holm Nelson...American sociologist, philosopher, and pioneer of > information technology. ...coined the term "hypertext" in 1963 and > published > it in 1965. ... The main thrust of his work has been to make computers > easily accessible to ordinary people. His motto is: "A user interface > should > be so simple that a beginner in an emergency can understand it within > ten > seconds." ...founded Project Xanadu in 1960 with the goal of creating a > computer network with a simple user interface. ... The Xanadu project > itself failed to flourish, for a variety of reasons which are disputed. > Journalist Gary Wolf published an unflattering history, The Curse of > Xanadu, > on Nelson and his project in the June, 1995 issue of Wired magazine. > ... > Some aspects of its vision are in the process of being fulfilled by Tim > Berners-Lee's invention of the World Wide Web. The Web owes much of its > inspiration to Xanadu, but Nelson dislikes the World Wide Web, XML and > all > embedded markup, and regards Berners-Lee's work as a gross > over-simplification of his own work: "HTML is precisely what we were > trying > to PREVENT- ever-breaking links, links going outward only, quotes you > can't > follow to their origins, no version management, no rights management." > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Nelson) > > Note 4 - HTML > >> From RFC 1866 > > The HTML document type was designed by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN as > part of the 1990 World Wide Web project. In 1992, Dan Connolly wrote > the HTML Document Type Definition (DTD) and a brief HTML > specification. > >> From Wikipedia: > > "HTML is defined in formal specifications that were developed and > published > throughout the 1990s, inspired by Tim Berners-Lee's prior proposals to > graft > hypertext capability onto a homegrown SGML-like markup language for the > Internet. The first published specification for a language called HTML > was > drafted by Berners-Lee with Dan Connolly, and was published in 1993 by > the > IETF as a formal "application" of SGML (with an SGML Document Type > Definition defining the grammar). The IETF created an HTML Working > Group in > 1994 and published HTML 2.0 in 1995, but further development under the > auspices of the IETF was stalled by competing interests. Since 1996, > the > HTML specifications have been maintained, with input from commercial > software vendors, by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). ..." > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Html) > Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan (chris at cs.utexas.edu) Contact info: www.cs.utexas.edu/~chris/ From dhc2 at dcrocker.net Sat Oct 7 08:58:34 2006 From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 08:58:34 -0700 Subject: [ih] WWW dates In-Reply-To: <001b01c6e993$aa2ba850$eba8a8c0@quisitor> References: <001b01c6e993$aa2ba850$eba8a8c0@quisitor> Message-ID: <4527CEAA.6030307@dcrocker.net> Phill Gross wrote: > 1960 - Ted Nelson founds Project Xanadu. See Note 3 below. > > 1989 - Tim Berners-Lee initiates Web proposal within CERN ("Weaving the > Web", p22) Phill, It is probably it worth citing some additional activities that took place during the intervening 29 years. A few thoughts: The Englebart and Nelson work is usually cited for the invention of the hyperlink construct. More generally, the ARC created a rather widespread community that shared documents, although operationally it was a central service. My own view is that the distributed Internet web service began with Anonymous FTP. For nearly 2 decades, it was the standard way to publish public information. Although its human factors design really sucked, it was entirely useful for the existing networking community. Since Anonymous FTP was a usage variation of FTP, rather than a technical enhancement requiring specification, I'm not sure its inception was documented. I would guess it was fully functional by 1975, but have no direct memory of who or when it was started. In the late 80's, as use of the net grew, there were multiple efforts to make it easier to publish, find and access documents around the net. On the publication side, I would be inclined to at least cite Gopher, especially since it offered serious, direct competition to the Web approach for a number of years. Gopher was in extensive use before the Web. I remember doing a class on Internet technology in 1990, in Pittsburgh. We did a real-time demonstration of Gopher, where the class chose which nodes we would pursue. We started with a global list of regions and eventually walked our way down an access path, winding up looking at the Town Council minutes for Wellington, New Zealand. I remember being struck by how easily we could access something that distant, non-technical and, frankly, mundane. That the Wellington Town Council was willing and able to publish this material suggested the eventual ease and impact of global availability. Having alternate approaches around made the choice of the http/html/browser that much stronger, since it made clear the balance between effort and benefits. Gopher was easier to publish, because the documents were simple text. HTML required special effort to create, but produced more broadly appealing results. Better still is that it seemed to get the learning/use/benefit balance just right. Original HTML was strikingly simple, but produced wonderful results. Both Gopher and the Web had diffuse control. Any hierarchy of reference was an artifact of operational construction, rather than being inherent in the storage model. Gopher distinguished between directory entries and documents. Documents were only available at the leaf of the access tree. One could spend a long time walking down an access path, only to find that the accessed document was not relevant. By contrast, the web offered the ability to get something useful to the user -- ie, document contents -- anywhere along an access path. Hence it's user "reward" experience is quicker and more extensive. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From the.map at alum.mit.edu Sat Oct 7 13:33:56 2006 From: the.map at alum.mit.edu (Mike Padlipsky) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:33:56 -0700 Subject: [ih] WWW dates In-Reply-To: <4527CEAA.6030307@dcrocker.net> References: <001b01c6e993$aa2ba850$eba8a8c0@quisitor> <4527CEAA.6030307@dcrocker.net> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20061007130938.01e04c38@alum.mit.edu> At 08:58 AM 10/7/2006, Dave Crocker wrote: >Since Anonymous FTP was a usage variation of >FTP, rather than a technical enhancement >requiring specification, I'm not sure its >inception was documented. I would guess it was >fully functional by 1975, but have no direct >memory of who or when it was started. funny you should mention that. from "And They Argued All Night..." ...over whose claim was right: first at which, and for what, and with whom. M.A. Padlipsky Copyright ? 2000 by the author. [matrix news, peter h. salus, editor, somemonthorother, 2000; full piece still available in/on the author's 'personal web page' even tho the matrix news site seems to've gone away]: [...] The neat ideas zipped around the design meetings at a great rate of speed (and volume, usually; in both senses of the term). Even before we all hit at best EarlyMiddleage (and I fear I crossed over into MiddleMiddleage last May; most of the others still have a few years to go, though, damn them) we didn't really remember who'd come up with which neat notion. Indeed, over at least a 22-year period before the untimely and intensely lamented death of Jon Postel, he and I had frequent conversations trying to reconstruct the origins of a number of neat notions and we almost never succeeded, even on many of the ones I was fairly sure had been his (which, in fact, was most of them). And before the 'Net became big business, it was fairly easy for us to shrug it off; things had worked out, and what did it matter whether he, or I, or Gary, or even one of the BBN guys -- who always seemed to get to write the histories and hence always seemed to have claimed to have invented everything, anyway, perhaps because BBN was the only "for-profit" to furnish key members of the original Network Working Group -- had actually been the first to enunciate an idea that was almost always implicit in the discussion to begin with? Now, however, there seems to be at least some celebrity value attached to that sort of thing, if not indeed some financial value. There might even just possibly be a minute amount of value to be attached to "historical accuracy", or "intellectual integrity", or some other hopelessly pre-GenX abstraction, but it would doubtless be a tactical error to espouse that sort of thing. Besides, as indicated, some of the current claims stick in my craw, and Peter did ask me to "write something" and didn't get at all specific as to what, so... Let's start with the one I'm in fact quite certain I was the inventor of, especially because I can't recall which of the BBN guys is claiming it and so I can put off the delicate question of whether I want to name names for a while longer: "anonymous login". I remember pretty clearly, despite being somewhat unsure as to who the other person in the conversation was (Dirk, maybe?), being at SRI for some sort of meeting sometime around 1973 and being told that "the NIC" (or at least Jake [=Elizabeth Feinler - PHS]) was worried about this idea to put the RFCs on-line, because they'd have to establish all sorts of accounts so people could FTP them. "That's easy," I said, "just use my NETML trick." By which I meant, and went on to explain, that just as I'd had to propound a conventional universal "dummy" id and password so that netmail (as we'd called it when we were inventing it, but I'll get to that soon enough) could work via FTP without causing grave harm to the security (and accounting) mechanisms of at least some of the Hosts (mainly Multics, of course, since I was the Multics Network Technical Liaison at the time), all the NIC needed to do was establish a single, known account everybody could use to slurp the RFC's from. "'guest' would be a perfectly fine id," I went on, "and the password should be 'anonymous', since we'd gain some measure of security in that people'd have to know how to spell it and of course not everybody does." Or words very close to that, and to exactly that effect, even if I actually gave the id and password values in the reverse order. [The NETML trick was enunciated in RFC 491, in case you care -- and in case it ever gets scanned in so you can care. -- MAP] Now, EarlyMiddleAge Memory (EMAM) being what it was, and MiddleMiddleAge Memory (MMAM) being what it is, naturally I don't recall whether I read that one of the BBN guys was laying claim to "anonymous login" the other year or saw it on one of those overly-coy little "courses" PBS (the P is for Pious, I like to observe) has taken to showing, before I decided they annoyed me so much I won't watch any more. (Even if I were on one? Irrelevant question. I didn't get rich, nor did I get my claims to've invented things into "the literature" early enough, because my company didn't get commissioned to write the "First 10 Years" report and wind up being visited first by the Internet history book writers.) But I submit that anybody who knows me knows that the crack about security has to be one of mine, and MMAM insists that whoever was laying the claim gave it as his own, which makes me suspect that the charitable explanation of parallel evolution doesn't apply and it was either his EMAM in play or just plain theft of intellectual property. Fortunately, anonymous login isn't really anything to be proud of -- especially since it was exploited for a famous security breach when it was misimplemented on a certain highly-popular Host type -- so I can rise above. reprinted by permission of the author /signed/ The Author [the reference to peter should be obvious; the reference to gary alludes to gary grossman, who was mentioned in the preceding paragraph, which i omitted because it depended on the paragraph that preceded it and i didn't want to make this even longer] cheers, map [whose shoulder problems caused him to break down some time ago and create a 'signature' file to apologize for the lack of his formerly customary e-volubility -- and who's been employing shiftless typing for a long time now to spare his wristsnfingers, in case you didn't know ... and who's further broken down and done http://www.lafn.org/~ba213/mapstuff.html , rather grudgingly] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: