W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: #428 Accept-Language ordering for identical qvalues

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 21:40:16 -0800
Cc: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <424D5D15-6D83-45D7-A957-DE19D30BAF7A@gbiv.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
On Jan 23, 2013, at 5:17 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> So, does anyone have an issue with making ordering significant when there's no qvalue for *all* headers that use qvalues?
> Roy, I'm interpreting your answer as "we don't do anything with this information today," but as per below I don't think this stops us from defining it that way.

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  There is no code out there today that would
correspond to such a change.  I don't like making changes to HTTP
just for the sake of imaginary consistency of definitions.
Making them for the sake of consistency with implementations is fine.

If it is a choice, I'd rather remove the line from Accept-Language
than introduce new (unproven) things to Accept.

Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 05:40:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:09 UTC