Re: [uriMediaType-9] New Internet Draft: Resrep Type

At 08:50 PM 3/27/02 +0000, Sean B. Palmer wrote:
>OTOH, "Repr-Type" for Content-features is an interesting
>prospect. Graham, you listed one of the advantages as
>"administratively and politically easier to achieve", but I
>actually can't work out what the registration process for new
>headers is from the RFC. I presume that they're just defined in
>RFCs, as for any normal HTTP header, so why would registering it
>as a content-feature header be a path of less resistance?

See RFC 2506.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>