W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Issue 40, Re: Status of IANA Considerations (registrations and registries) -- issues 40, 59, 72, 79

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:37:14 +0200
Message-ID: <484D320A.9030808@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> A. Message headers: <http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/40>
>>
>> I have added those throughout, but I wonder...:
>>
>> 1) What's the standards status of Content-Disposition?
>>
>> - it's defined in RFC2616, but it says: "Content-Disposition is not 
>> part of the HTTP standard, but since it is widely implemented, we are 
>> documenting its use and risks for implementors." (in the Security 
>> Considerations)
>>
>> - the initial registry (RFC4229) says "standard" 
>> (<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4229#section-2.1.22>)
>>
>> - however the actual registry 
>> (<http://www.iana.org/assignments/message-headers/perm-headers.html>) 
>> doesn't mention a status
>>
>> -> I'm tempted to leave it as defined in registry, so with no entry 
>> for the standard status
> 
> I vaguely remember struggling with this when we put the registry 
> together. It doesn't fit well, but one can look at its use in HTTP as 
> being defined in 2616 -- which is a standards-track document -- even if 
> 2616 goes out of its way to say that C-D isn't part of the standard.
> 
> In actuality, though, this is an artefact of the use of Semantic Web 
> technology to put together the registry. *shrug*
> 
> 
>> 2) Should we include more information, such as whether the header 
>> accepts list syntax? Can we, without changing the registration procedure?
> 
> This is what 'related information' is for.
 > ...

OK.

So for the headers defined by "us", we'd add that as "related 
information", but will not attempt any changes to the registration 
procedure...

BR, Julian
Received on Monday, 9 June 2008 13:38:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:48 GMT