W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Null change proposal for ISSUE-88 (mark II)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 21:31:25 +0200
To: "Leif Halvard Silli" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Kornel Lesinski" <kornel@geekhood.net>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vankinbi64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 19:07:19 +0200, Leif Halvard Silli  
<xn--mlform-iua@målform.no> wrote:
> Anne van Kesteren, Sun, 04 Apr 2010 11:55:21 +0200:
>> On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 04:37:55 +0200, Leif Halvard Silli
>> <xn--mlform-iua@målform.no> wrote:
>>> Ian Hickson, Sat, 3 Apr 2010 22:38:12 +0000 (UTC):
>>>> Browsers _do_ implement it, contrary to HTML4, which intends it for
>>>> servers, who don't implement it. You may wish to recheck your facts.
>>>
>>> Incorrect: Browsers implement it *because* HTML4 say that can do it. It
>>> is not against HTML4 to do so. See
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/dirlang#h-8.1.2
>>
>> Actually, that does not talk about <meta http-equiv>, just about HTTP.
>
> The point which you need to understand is that to HTML4, the wording
> "http header" relates to both the content of <meta> http-equiv elements
> as well as to the "proper" http headers which originate from the
> server. Both are http headers.

Maybe that is so (I have not seen it). However, that would only be because  
HTML4 assumes servers will interpret <meta http-equiv> elements and serve  
up the content with the headers specified with those elements. However,  
servers do not do this, so the two are not equivalent in practice. And  
therefore you are wrong.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:32:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:07 GMT