W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: Issue 165, was: Issue 163, was: Meaning of invalid but well-formed dates

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 13:47:23 +0200
Message-ID: <4BBC70CB.4090002@gmx.de>
To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
CC: 'Daniel Stenberg' <daniel@haxx.se>, 'Jamie Lokier' <jamie@shareable.org>, 'Geoffrey Sneddon' <foolistbar@googlemail.com>, 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 02.04.2010 20:00, Julian Reschke wrote:
> ...
>> I have opened a separate issue for this question
>> (<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/165>).
>> ...
>
> The simplest way to fix this seems to add a SHOULD level requirement in
> Appendix A, which already defines tolerant date handling. Like this:
>
> o Although all date formats are specified to be case-sensitive,
> recipients SHOULD match day, week and timezone names case-
> insensitively.
>
> See
> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/165/i165.diff>
> ...

Change applied with 
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/807>.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 7 April 2010 11:48:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:17 GMT