- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:02:03 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Mark Nottingham wrote: > Wasn't there also some aspect whereby a negotiated resource would make > the links relative to the C-L URL, thereby messing things up? > ... Ah, that part. So the issue is: the C-L *does* set the base URI, it may break relative links when original URI and CL-URI use different paths (well, unless the format allows setting the base URI in-line as well, for instance in HTML using the <base> element). So how about changing: "Remove base URI setting semantics for Content-Location due to poor implementation support." to "Remove base URI setting semantics for Content-Location due to poor implementation support, which was caused by too many broken servers emitting bogus Content-Location headers, and also the potentially undesirable effect of potentially breaking relative links in content-negotiated resources." ? BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 10:02:42 UTC