- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:14:12 +0100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: > Hi, > > in part 1 we currently say: > > "The field value MAY be preceded by optional whitespace; a single SP is > preferred. The field-value does not include any leading or trailing > white space: OWS occurring before the first non-whitespace character of > the field-value or after the last non-whitespace character of the > field-value is ignored and MAY be removed without changing the meaning > of the header field." -- > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-07.html#rfc.section.4.2.p.4> > > > In the current edits, the last 'MAY' is a 'SHOULD', which makes it read > > "A field value MAY be preceded by optional whitespace (OWS); a single SP > is preferred. The field value does not include any leading or trailing > white space: OWS occurring before the first non-whitespace character of > the field value or after the last non-whitespace character of the field > value is ignored and SHOULD be removed without changing the meaning of > the header field." > > I think what we really should say is that they MAY be removed before > passing the field-value to a specific header parser, thus definitions of > headers MUST NOT make the presence of trailing/leading whitespace > semantically significant. Now tracked as <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/201>. Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 21 January 2010 16:14:52 UTC