At 08:46 08/08/22, Robert J Burns wrote: >On Aug 22, 2008, at 2:20 AM, Andrew Cunningham wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, August 22, 2008 5:55 am, Henri Sivonen wrote: >>> >> >>>> In any case, all of the http-equiv attributes are defined by HTTP. >>>> That is its definition in HTML. >>> >>> It's not the definition in HTML5 as drafted. >> >> exactly, but I believe Roy's point is that Content-Language isn't >> part of >> HTML, rather its part of the HTTP standard and defined there, and that >> HTML5 should not be defining its own version. > >True, but the other contention (not mine) is that the http-equiv >pragmas are to be decoupled in HTML5 from their http definitions >(leaving just their names as a historical artifact). The biggest >problem I see with that is that we've seen no use cases or problem >statements to justify such a (potentially very confusing) decoupling. And that (as Roy has cited) that there are existing (server) implementations that depend on the coupling between HTTP headers and "meta http-equiv" data. So: No reason to change, all reasons for keeping it as is. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jpReceived on Friday, 22 August 2008 08:00:18 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:18 GMT