- From: Loïc Hoguin <essen@ninenines.eu>
- Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 13:57:44 +0000
- To: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@ripple.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 10/30/2017 11:57 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote: > Hi HTTPbis, Hello, > I'd like a few minutes of your time in Singapore to solicit interest in > pursuing something along the lines of what I have > in draft-hope-bailie-http-payments-00 [1]. As you may or may not be > aware, all major browsers are shipping, or close to shipping new payment > APIs based on the specifications [2][3] developed in the W3C Web > Payments working group. I've noticed a small issue in the draft. > 4.1. The "Pay" Header > > The body of the "Pay" header is defined as follows: > > Pay: <payment-method-identifier> <amount> <address> <payment-method-data> > > Multiple "Pay" headers MAY be present in an HTTP 402 response. RFC7230 3.2.2 says this: A sender MUST NOT generate multiple header fields with the same field name in a message unless either the entire field value for that header field is defined as a comma-separated list [i.e., #(values)] or the header field is a well-known exception (as noted below). A recipient MAY combine multiple header fields with the same field name into one "field-name: field-value" pair, without changing the semantics of the message, by appending each subsequent field value to the combined field value in order, separated by a comma. The only exception to that is the Set-cookie header. The draft does not seem to say whether the Pay header is a comma separated list of payment methods and if it's not then the generic behavior above cannot apply. It would be great to avoid another exception. Cheers, -- Loïc Hoguin https://ninenines.eu
Received on Tuesday, 31 October 2017 13:58:13 UTC