W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Warn header (P6) vs RFC2047 encoding

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:02:12 +1000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <DDCD65FB-792D-45B3-B699-8A25D8BB60EC@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Tracking in <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/187>


On 23/07/2009, at 8:22 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I noticed that P6 still has a normative dependency on RFC 2047: for  
> encoding non-ISO-8859-1 characters in Warn headers:
>
> "The warn-text SHOULD be in a natural language and character set  
> that is most likely to be intelligible to the human user receiving  
> the response. This decision can be based on any available knowledge,  
> such as the location of the cache or user, the Accept-Language field  
> in a request, the Content-Language field in a response, etc. The  
> default language is English and the default character set is  
> ISO-8859-1 ([ISO-8859-1]).
>
> If a character set other than ISO-8859-1 is used, it MUST be encoded  
> in the warn-text using the method described in [RFC2047]." -- <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-latest.html#rfc.section.3.6.p.9 
> >
>
> I think this should be dropped the same way we already did it for  
> the Reason Phrase (see <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/94 
> >).
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 06:02:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:08 GMT