- From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:36:14 +0100
- To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- CC: W3C MWBP WG <public-bpwg@w3.org>
I think we are between the devil and the deep blue sea on this. If we say that you can't extend it then aren't we contradicting RFC 2616 which says you can? If we don't say you can't, then it's open to interpretation and that is probably the best we can do. I think we resolved this on some call or other but maybe we should re-resolve it? Jo On 22/09/2009 11:33, Francois Daoust wrote: > Jo Rabin wrote: > [...] >> 2) ACTION-928 >> >> Registration of X-Device Headers >> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/track/actions/928 >> >> The reviewer's comments ref section 4.1.5.5 spelling out the headers >> is addressed in a previous editor's draft. >> > > I think part of the comment [1] might bounce back: > [[ as written, an implementer might conceivably feel free to add > additional headers that have not been registered. ]] > > While section 4.1.5.5 now includes the mapping table, it does leave open > the possibility to add additional headers that have not been registered. > > Francois. > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Aug/0028.html > > > > [...]
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 10:37:09 UTC