- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:13:52 -0800
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
On Nov 9, 2010, at 12:47 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 09.11.2010 02:53, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> ... >>> - there's disagreement about whether we should require specific handling of invalid messages >> >> Actually, I think we have agreement that it should *not* be required; the current discussion is whether it's useful to specify optional handling, and where that should be done. Does anyone disagree (i.e., think it should be required as part of HTTP)? > > I agree it should not be required. > > (Note that even HTML5 allows recipients to reject non-conforming HTML) Optional defined error recovery seems like a good step, so I am hesitant to rock the boat, but would it be a plausible future direction to say implementations must either use the defined error recovery or reject (with a clearly defined meaning of reject, i.e. completely ignore that header field, or discard the whole message, or whatever)? Regards, Maciej
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2010 19:14:39 UTC