- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:27:17 +0100
- To: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
- CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
On 11.02.2011 16:52, Karl Dubost wrote: > > Le 9 févr. 2011 à 19:32, Mark Nottingham a écrit : >> Consuming implementations MAY take steps to recover a usable field-value from an invalid header field, but SHOULD NOT reject the message outright, unless this is explicitly desirable behaviour (e.g., the implementation is a validator). As such, the default handling of invalid fields is to ignore them. > > Proposal: > > ---8<--- > Consuming implementations MAY fix an invalid header field into a usable field-value. Consuming implementations SHOULD NOT reject the message. > > Note: For some specific class of products, implementations might need to behave differently. (e.g., the implementation is a validator). As such, the default handling of invalid fields is to ignore them. > ---8<--- Note I went with Mark's proposal. Karl's sounds good as well; does anybody have a strong preference? Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 14:27:59 UTC