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

Re: Issue 248: client "Date" requirements

From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:50:39 +0200 (CEST)
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Robert Brewer <fumanchu@aminus.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1010180848460.32431@tvnag.unkk.fr>
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010, Mark Nottingham wrote:

>> "Clients MAY send a Date header (when a clock is present)".
>
> This is a bit too brief IMO; the advice about not sending it without a 
> payload is useful (because it saves bytes, as you noted).

Can I also point out that the "(when a clock is present)" part is unnecessary 
since if it is a MAY any implementor that doesn't have a clock surely will 
then consider not sending a date or will have another way of figuring out the 
timestamp to include there...

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Monday, 18 October 2010 06:51:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:29 GMT