- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:34:44 +1100
- To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
- Cc: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, "Gavin Peters (蓋文彼德斯)" <gavinp@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
RFC2045 doesn't define HTTP headers. On 18/10/2010, at 7:26 PM, Eric J. Bowman wrote: > Alexey Melnikov wrote: >> >> Mark Nottingham wrote: >> >>> I think the only really bad/damaging thing here is starting with an >>> "X-" header. >> >> Maybe it is time to deprecate the X- convention, as it doesn't seem >> to be working. >> > > "In the future, more top-level types may be defined only by a > standards-track extension to this standard. If another top-level type > is to be used for any reason, it must be given a name starting with > "X-" to indicate its non-standard status and to avoid a potential > conflict with a future official name." > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045 > > It's RFC 2045 you'd need to change, not HTTP... > > -Eric -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 18 October 2010 08:35:19 UTC