- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 11:25:48 -0700
- To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Appendix A.1 of the current header compression draft shows "get" and not "GET" as the pre-filled value... http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-00#appendix-A.1 Regardless, this is not a compressor issue. It's a http semantic layer issue. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with Martin-- this data should be as it was in HTTP/1.1 > > Reasoning: > 1) It works. > 2) The methods are so very extremely likely to already be represented in the > compressor, that we shouldn't much care about what is in them anyway. > > -=R > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On 3 July 2013 10:43, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Need to clarify whether or not HTTP methods in 2.0 >> > are case sensitive or not. >> >> HTTP/2.0 is actually silent on the issue. And I believe that it can >> remain so. >> >> HTTP/2.0 makes header field names lowercase (and mandates that), which >> is fine because that has a performance and compression advantage. A >> similar argument could be made for any header field value, :method not >> being particularly special in this regard. >> >> In this specific case, if we were to mandate a particular case, I'd >> advocate uppercase. I believe that some code breaks if it receives a >> 'get' instead of a 'GET', so uppercase would have to be the choice. >> >
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 18:26:35 UTC