- From: Rafal Pietrak <cookie.rp@ztk-rp.eu>
- Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2021 17:19:15 +0200
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
W dniu 24.10.2021 o 10:32, Amos Jeffries pisze: > On 13/10/21 8:38 pm, Rafal Pietrak wrote: >> Dear Everybody, >> >> Some time ago I've drafted a proposal for cookie-radius >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pietrak-cookie-scope/). This was >> not received well, so I've decided not to press the matter. >> >> But, since then I've learned, that there is a (currently depreciated) >> http-equiv.set-cookie <meta> tag attribute. Since this was implemented >> in most browsers, may be an improved definition of it's semantics could >> make it useful again. >> > > Please be aware that "http-equiv" META are expected to cause the Browser > the same behaviour as if the key name (here "set-cookie") was a received > HTTP header. Yes, I expect that. That's the reason, why I've suggested a change of the actual name of the header line (to plain "Cookie") - to indicate the requirement to "slightly" break the http-equivalence. (I've called it "cookie" to stumble a "too direct" reading, not to suggest any actual definition - that's to be worked out by the working group). > > So your proposal needs to be made to change RFC 6265 as changes to the > Set-Cookie and Cookie headers themselves. OK. Yes. Great. But is it possible? I'll be more then willing to help work it out: cook the phrasing, provide arguments, analyse consequences, etc. With best regards, -- RafaĆ Pietrak
Received on Sunday, 24 October 2021 15:32:56 UTC