On 05.12.2010 13:46, Julian Reschke wrote: > Hi Noah, > > thanks for the feedback. Let's see what the current draft says in > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-12#section-9.4>: > > > -- snip -- > Note: This specification does not define precedence rules for the > case where the original URI, as navigated to by the user agent, > and the Location header field value both contain fragment > identifiers. > -- snip -- > > We could extend that text like that: > > -- snip -- > Note: This specification does not define precedence rules for the > case where the original URI, as navigated to by the user agent, > and the Location header field value both contain fragment > identifiers. Thus be aware that including fragment identifiers > might inconvenience anyone relying on the semantics of the > original URI's fragment identifier. > -- snip -- > > So this is just a clarification of the current spec's position. Is the > WG ok with sticking with this position (not specifying the rule)? > > Best regards, Julian Hi, change applied with <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1097>. I believe that this ticket can be closed once the next set of drafts is published, unless we change our mind and *want* to specify a rule for recombination. Best regards, JulianReceived on Friday, 10 December 2010 09:04:12 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:33 GMT