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

Re: The Title header

From: David W. Morris <dwm@shell.portal.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 12:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
To: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
Cc: jg@zorch.w3.org, Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>, 'Gisle Aas' <aas@a.sn.no>, "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU>, "'http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com'" <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960719120956.558B-100000@jobe.shell.portal.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1146

On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, John Franks wrote:

> In fact, I would find an argument to make it mandatory persuasive.

I wouldn't be happy about any change to http which made analysis of the
content of a file mandatory. We should not demand that servers 
analyze HTML.

And in current practice, my experience as the designer of a search 
tool is that titles are used to provide meaningful captions on browser
screens not sumarize the document content which would be useful for
search engines.

I haven't looked at the mime spec so it may already agree with me ... but
if HTTP were to include a header relating to title or document content
it should be clearly a document description which might be provided by
a server and might (NOT mandatory) be provided by content analysis or
meta data stored by the server external to the document. It should not
be directly specified as being a particular element of a particular 
content type.

Dave Morris
Received on Friday, 19 July 1996 12:33:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:17 UTC