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

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 UTC