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

Re: Issue 261: Check for requirements backing test cases, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 12:11:11 +0100
Message-ID: <4CCFF1CF.3000507@gmx.de>
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 02.11.2010 09:56, Adam Barth wrote:
> ...
> I'm more interested in the invalid header field instances.  This
> document doesn't explain how to parse them, much less how to process
> them.
> ...

No, it doesn't (and that's a separate discussion).

While we are at it, let me explain why 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc2231/> has tests for invalid header fields 
in the first place. After all, if I don't really want to specify how 
they are processed, right?

The reason why there are there is that they serve the purpose of 
observing whether there is any kind of interop in UAs. If there was, it 
would be interesting to see whether that is by accident, or because 
existing content actually requires it.

I imagine that it is controversial how I rate the results. The idea is 
to say "pass" when the header field is ignored, "warn" when something 
happens that could be considered harmless, or "fail" when something 
serious happens (like UA crashing).

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 2 November 2010 11:11:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:32 GMT