W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > March 1999

Re: RFC for mediator warnings

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 10:53:42 +0100
Message-Id: <199903090953.KAA16008@www47.inria.fr>
To: "Silas S. Brown" <ssb22@cam.ac.uk>
cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org, ping@lfw.org

> On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Daniel Dardailler wrote:
> > Let me see if I get this clearly: you expect HTTP1.0 agents to
> > implement your extension before they implement a piece of 1.1 ?
> 
> Not really.  The access gateway puts the stuff in META tags, and looks for
> it in META tags.  That way, it doesn't matter what the server is.  (Have a
> look at the HTML source of any page returned by the gateway to see what I
> mean)

I know you're using HTTP-EQUIV but that's just a "replacement" for a
real HTTP header, isn't it ?

In any case, why would using Warning instead of X-Mediator-Warning in
the context of HTTP-EQUIV give you different result wrt HTTP support ?
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 1999 04:53:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:32 GMT