W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: NEW ISSUE: Drop Content-Location

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:09:15 -0800
Message-Id: <B1DC6472-2185-4D5C-9092-0C87748A93F8@yahoo-inc.com>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>

HTTP headers have a separate name space in the message header  
registry, so it can be done;
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/message-headers/perm-headers.html


On 2006/12/01, at 10:24 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> On Nov 29, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> The only thing that should be changed at this point is 14.14:
>>
>>    The value of Content-Location also defines the base URI for the
>>    entity.
>>
>> s/also defines/does not define/;
>
> Actually, that can't be done either because Content-Location is a
> MIME header field and its meaning for MIME parts and RTSP is  
> applicable
> regardless of the current behavior of browsers.
>
>    http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2557
>    http://www.zvon.org/tmRFC/RFC2557/Output/chapter4.html
>
> I think the browser vendors should put a little more effort into
> deploying the feature.  For example, by selectively disabling it for
> specific servers based on run-time testable behavior and
> reporting the errors when found so that the owner can fix them.
> It is, after all, a detectable error that can be worked around.
> It could even be a configurable option wherein content-location
> would only be used if the base URI is unknown or if the option is set.
>
> ....Roy
>

--
Mark Nottingham
mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Monday, 4 December 2006 19:10:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:53 GMT