- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 18:54:21 +0200
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
* Julian Reschke wrote: >the spec currently says: > >"Clients SHOULD only send a Date header field in messages that include a >payload, as is usually the case for PUT and POST requests, and even then >it is optional. A client without a clock MUST NOT send a Date header >field in a request." > >(this comes from RFC 2616). > >This is very wrong: > >"SHOULD only .. and even then it is optional". > >So, if it's optional, it's MAY. I don't believe we need to say that >clients "MAY" send a Date header :-). It's saying that a client must not send a Date header if the client has no clock, it should not send a Date header of there is no payload, and it may send a Date header otherwise. The wording may not be optimal but the intent seems clear. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Monday, 11 October 2010 16:54:59 UTC