- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 12:11:11 +0100
- To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
- CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 02.11.2010 09:56, Adam Barth wrote: > ... > I'm more interested in the invalid header field instances. This > document doesn't explain how to parse them, much less how to process > them. > ... No, it doesn't (and that's a separate discussion). While we are at it, let me explain why <http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc2231/> has tests for invalid header fields in the first place. After all, if I don't really want to specify how they are processed, right? The reason why there are there is that they serve the purpose of observing whether there is any kind of interop in UAs. If there was, it would be interesting to see whether that is by accident, or because existing content actually requires it. I imagine that it is controversial how I rate the results. The idea is to say "pass" when the header field is ignored, "warn" when something happens that could be considered harmless, or "fail" when something serious happens (like UA crashing). Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 2 November 2010 11:11:49 UTC