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

Re: Unifying & standardizing X-Moz & X-Purpose headers

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:34:44 +1100
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>
Message-Id: <1B984DD4-6751-4487-BF9E-269B2B1B858B@mnot.net>
To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
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 GMT

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