- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2007 17:36:21 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 20:55:52 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > the current editor's draft of HTML5 requires User-Agents to respect the > HTTP Link header (as specified in RFC2068, and dropped from RFC2616) -- > see <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#the-link>: > > "Some versions of HTTP defined a Link: header, to be processed like a > series of link elements. When processing links, those must be taken > into consideration as well. For the purposes of ordering, links defined > by HTTP headers must be assumed to come before any links in the > document, in the order that they were given in the HTTP entity header. > Relative URIs in these headers must be resolved according to the rules > given in HTTP, not relative to base URIs set by the document (e.g. using > a base element or xml:base attributes). [RFC2616] [RFC2068]" > > So either this is just wishful thinking, or implementation support for > the Link header has indeed improved lately (I'll guess in FF and Opera). > In the latter case, we may want to re-add it in RFC2616bis. There's also a Default-Style header. For both it's not really to me though what RFC 2616 would say about them though, other than maybe register the names. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 3 September 2007 15:36:33 UTC