- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 05:43:26 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Mark Nottingham wrote: > On 24/08/2009, at 12:20 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > > > > Anne? Ian? IIRC both of your requested the removal of "rev"; how do > > > you feel about leaving it in the grammar but strengthening the text > > > to clarify that implementations are not required to interpret / use > > > it? > > > > My ideal situation would be for rev=""'s semantics and (more > > importantly) user agent conformance criteria to be fully defined in > > detail, but for the authoring conformance criteria to make _use_ of > > rev="" non-conforming. > > I.e., define the semantics of rev in case it's received, but prohibit > sending it? Right, exactly. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 24 August 2009 05:42:57 UTC