- From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 22:05:42 -0500
- To: "'HTTP Working Group'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > Allowing relative URIs hardly seems a "dirty URI" issue. As for the > actual "dirty URI" issue, that isn't solved as long as HTTP keeps > insisting the header takes an actual URI rather than such a > "dirty URI". The ways in which implementers fail to the protocol don't need to be formally enumerated in the specification. An informal guide is more than sufficient. An informal guide will also be easier to update than an IETF specification when implementers find creative new ways to ignore standards. A standard is supposed to be the intersection of implementers' agreement, not the union of their mistakes. - Brian
Received on Wednesday, 8 April 2009 03:06:26 UTC