W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2018

Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-expect-ct-04, "2.3.2. HTTP-Equiv <meta> Element Attribute"

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 05:50:21 +0200
To: Emily Stark <estark@google.com>
Cc: httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <c0fa34f9-e6b3-809e-2210-f38b58930cce@gmx.de>
On 2018-05-21 19:07, Emily Stark wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:27 AM Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de 
> <mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de>> wrote:
> 
>     "UAs MUST NOT heed http-equiv="Expect-CT" attribute settings on <meta>
>     elements [HTML] [HTML5] in received content."
> 
>     Here be dragons.
> 
>     1. HTML and HTML5 appear in a "MUST NOT" statement, yet are listed as
>     informative references.
> 
>     2. Even if they were normative references, we'd have to tell readers
>     which one takes precedence (surprise: the description of http-equiv is
>     indeed different in these two - see
>     <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18025>).
> 
>     3. AFAIU, this spec *can't* make normative requirements on HTML
>     consumers. That's what the HTML spec is for.
> 
>     4. Finally, the HTML spec already says that "Expect-CT" is
>     non-conforming and to be ignored.
> 
> 
> Where is that? I don't see any mention of Expect-CT in either HTML.
> ...

It defines (a) which values are conforming and (b) what have an effect.

This can be changed, but it would be a change to the HTML spec.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2018 03:50:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:15:21 UTC