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

Re: [draft-nottingham-http-link-header-06] rev

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>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0908240543160.13844@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
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 GMT

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