- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:05:16 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote: > > My understanding is that a proposal along these lines* is acceptable, > with one exception; Julian believes that if we do this, we should also > relax the client-side requirement. Yes. > One way to do that would be to change "SHOULD"->"should" (i.e., make it > advisory text, instead of a requirement). > > Thoughts? > ... I don't think that lowercasing the requirement is sufficient; it's still a requirement. My proposal is to get rid of it, so to drop: "However, the indications given by the Allow header field value SHOULD be followed." completely. BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2008 08:05:51 UTC