- From: Ross Patterson <ROSSP@ss1.reston.vmd.sterling.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 17:16:26 +0100 (BST)
- To: http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Section 4.2 "Message Headers" in RFC 1945 (HTTP 1.0) reads: "HTTP header fields, which include General-Header (Section 4.3), Request-Header (Section 5.2), Response-Header (Section 6.2), and Entity-Header (Section 7.1) fields, follow the same generic format as that given in Section 3.1 of RFC 822 [7]. Each header field consists of a name followed immediately by a colon (":"), a single space (SP) character, and the field value." The same section in the current HTTP 1.1 spec reads: "HTTP header fields, which include general-header (section 4.5), request-header (section 5.3), response-header (section 6.2), and entity-header (section 7.1) fields, follow the same generic format as that given in Section 3.1 of RFC 822 [9]. Each header field consists of a name followed by a colon (":") and the field value. Field names are case-insensitive. The field value MAY be preceded by any amount of LWS, though a single SP is preferred." In the process of liberalizing the syntax to allow LWS where SP was previously required, we have made the whitespace optional altogether. I don't believe this was intentional, as such a basic syntactic change would require incrementing the HTTP-Version major level (due to the incompatibility with HTTP 1.0). I suggest rewording the middle sentence to say something like the following, and leaving the last sentence intact: "Each header field consists of a name followed by a colon (":"), linear whitespace (LWS), and the field value." I know this sounds like a nit, but I have a customer citing this reference as allowing something like "If-Modified-Since:Sat, 29 Oct 1994 19:43:31 GMT", and I'd rather thank him for helping us clean it up than tell him the HTTP 1.1 spec is in error. Ross Patterson VM Software Division Sterling Software, Inc.
Received on Monday, 12 October 1998 06:09:48 UTC