Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02

On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 2:29 AM, Julian Reschke <> wrote:
> On 02.10.2010 23:48, Adam Barth wrote:
>> There seems to be a lot of things generated by the grammar that are
>> nonsensical.  ...
> Such as?

On closer inspection, the repeated filename issue is the most important.

>> Indeed.  However, this document does not contain the rules for
>> consuming the header in sufficient detail for me to implement a user
>> agent.  I need to look at another document for that information.
>> Sadly, that document doesn't yet exist.
> You are claiming that it is insufficient to only accept valid headers.
> Please provide evidence, then we have something to discuss.

Jungshik Shin says "There are a lot of web sites that do what's
expected by IE."

Do you have evidence that, for example, the percent encoding is rarely
used?  In the absence of evidence, it's unlikely implementations will
remove support for the behavior.


Received on Sunday, 3 October 2010 18:13:23 UTC