- From: Andrew Daviel <andrew@andrew.triumf.ca>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 13:15:31 -0800 (PST)
- To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
In HTML, <META HTTP-EQUIV="Blah" is supposed to be equivalent to an HTTP header "Blah:", yes ? What is the position on creating new HTTP-EQUIV types (and presumeably equivalent HTTP headers) ? In the Dublin Core metadata work a form <registry>.<name>[.<type>] seems to be accepted, e.g. <META NAME="DC.Author" CONTENT="Joe Fish"> and perhaps <META HTTP-EQUIV="DC.Author.email" CONTENT="jfish@pisces.org"> and the equivalent DC.Author.email: jfish@pisces.org as an HTTP header which might imply that the "DC" portion should be reserved for the DC crowd, and registry-less names be reserved for the HTTP group. What I don't want to see, obviously, is people generating headers like Expires: 4/5/99 Location: Bournemouth Andrew Daviel TRIUMF & Vancouver Webpages
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 1997 13:19:31 UTC