- From: David W. Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 10:47:53 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Maurizio Codogno <mau@beatles.cselt.it>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
On Mon, 28 Jul 1997, Maurizio Codogno wrote: > As I see things, a reasonable solution for Comment-URL could be > that servers MUST NOT send any cookie for URLS referenced in Comment-URL, It makes no sense to place any requirement on the server since it has no way of knowing the usage context for a particular URL request AND all issues can be easily handled by the client. > and that clients SHOULD discard them if received. > > UA, then, MAY let users accept any cookie which come with a Comment-URL > already "accepted" (and from the same domain, blah blah...). It cannot be > neither a MUST nor a SHOULD, of course, but it makes sense that if > you trust a cookie from a site because you agreed with the policy, it is > useless to show it over and over again. I agree, but useless is a UI usability issue, not a protocol issue. Take a look at the exact wording in Dave's latest pre-draft. > > .mau. > > ps : why is this discussions taking place in http-wg , rather than in > http-state? Because we are now about to have LAST-CALL and the whole WG must be involved.
Received on Monday, 28 July 1997 10:51:05 UTC