- From: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 16:51:27 +0000
- To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 16:51:58 UTC
Our RFC2616bis says this: The order in which header fields with the same field name are received is therefore significant to the interpretation of the combined field value; a proxy MUST NOT change the order of these field values when forwarding a message. If 1.1 says that order is always significant and we're not supposed to be changing 1.1 semantics.... Sent from Windows Mail From: Amos Jeffries<mailto:squid3@treenet.co.nz> Sent: ?Friday?, ?November? ?22?, ?2013 ?6?:?22? ?AM To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org<mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org> On 22/11/2013 4:37 p.m., Mark Nottingham wrote: > To be clear - what makes me somewhat comfortable with this approach is that the default is that order is preserved; only if you know that ordering *is* insignificant are you allowed to break it up. > +1. Amos
Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 16:51:58 UTC