W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1996

Re: suggested wording concerning Host

From: Dave Kristol <dmk@allegra.att.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 96 15:26:09 EST
Message-Id: <9604022026.AA13075@zp.tempo.att.com.tempo.att.com>
To: fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU
Cc: jg@w3.org, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/156
  > > DMK:
  > > I've noticed a cumbersome locution spreading through the HTTP/1.1
  > > draft that I would like to cut off.  Here's an example:
  > > 
  > >     ... and the Host request header (present if the request-URI is not
  > >     an absoluteURI) ...
  > Roy:
  > Argh, where did that come from?  The Host header is ALWAYS present in
  > HTTP/1.1.  It is never removed, not even when the full-URI is present.
  > It will not be removed until HTTP/2.0, which is a different specification.

The words were in Koen Holtmann's mailing on content negotiation.  I
agree with your point that Host is always required, so that's an error
in Koen's wording.

But it's the intent of the wording I'm trying to get at.  There will be
other places where someone is trying to say, "the host that appears in
absoluteURI, or, if there is no absoluteURI, the host that appears in
the Host request header."  I want to shorten that locution to

Dave Kristol
Received on Tuesday, 2 April 1996 12:36:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:16 UTC