- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:34:12 +0200
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 12:51:11PM +1000, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 7 June 2016 at 17:10, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: > > I propose that we do not use URIs as keyid in any of the examples, > > but rather plain strings with no overloaded context such as > > keyid="key01294". > > Aw, you picked up on my terrible examples. I think that I might have > thought that the mailto: one was a good enough signal, or that the > lack of an 's' in http:// was enough to make someone think twice. But > you are right, people just aren't always that smart. People are even worse than that, most of them don't read the spec and will copy-paste from blogs, and the "smart" among them will say "look, I've read the standard and it is supposed to work this way" :-) While we're talking about the form, I'm seeing that all examples involve multi-line header fields, which are deprecated according to 7230#3.2.4. I obviously understand that it's easier for the presentation. In 5.6, it's mentionned that line wrapping is added for for presentation purposes only. Maybe a sentence about this should be added at the end of "3.", something like : Please note that all examples in this document use line wrapping for presentation purposes but headers fields should be sent as a single line to comply with RFC7230. And then you can drop the sentence from 5.6. Best regards, Willy
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2016 05:34:41 UTC