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

Re: Request for feedback on HTTP Location header syntax + semantics, Re: Issues 43 and 185, was: Issue 43 (combining fragments)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:41:53 +0100
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.u9etv3ao64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:38:43 +0100, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>  
> wrote:
>> Should we recommend the behavior we see implemented (SHOULD? MUST?)?  
>> Note that this would make current implementations of Opera and Safari
>> non-compliant.
>
> Is there a reason to use SHOULD rather than MUST? If not I'd say use  
> MUST.

In case it matters, rendering us non-compliant is fine if fixing our "bug"  
makes us more interoperable with Fx/IE.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 11 March 2010 15:42:27 GMT

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