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

Re: TICKET 259: 'treat as invalid' not defined

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 10:02:49 +0100
Message-ID: <4CD7BCB9.7060104@gmx.de>
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
CC: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 08.11.2010 00:43, Adam Barth wrote:
> ...
> Honestly, the browser.  We've tried this experiment with mixed content
> (HTTP resources inside HTTPS pages).  That's pretty much exactly what
> the messaging is in the user interface.  We get feedback from users
> that they've switched to other browsers that don't show them these
> scary warnings.
> ...

Can we please stop mixing up things?

Ignoring a header field does *not* require displaying an error message 
to the user. Nor does it break any kind of contract, as C-D is advisory 
only anyway.

What we *can* do is to say what a good way of "ignoring" broken stuff is.

For instance:

- if the value doesn't parse per the ABNF, it's invalid, so ignore the 
whole header

- if a parsed parameter value is invalid (percent-escaped sequence does 
not match the specified charset, for instance), ignore the *parameter* 
and go on

...but I'm not even sure that having the 2nd case makes any measurable 
difference in practice.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 09:03:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:55 UTC